Charles Barkley: The Suns 'pinning themselves in a corner' with 3-guard system

[Errntknght]

That's hardly proof. There are 30 teams with 60 starting big men between them. Like I said, I would like to see some stats that breaks down the entire league before I would say most big men don't play around the basket. You might be right but that seems like a huge leap just because you can name some shooting big men.

Here are some league summary stats from over the years so you can see how the game has changed - and not changed. The biggest change is the volume of three point shots - it has roughly tripled since 1990. PFs shoot 4 times as many now as they did then but so do SFs. For PFs 1 shot out of 6 is a 3, for PGs, SGs and SFs, 1 shot out of 3 is a 3 pointer. Centers are clearly lagging behind as they haven't increased their volume of 3's at all. Other than that the stats do not show a whole lot of evolution and the position labels mean as much now as they did then.

Averages by position, in the order PG, SG, SF, PF, C.
Stats are per 36 minutes. Stats have implicit decimal point before last digit.
Year = 1990
Player GP Min FGA FG% 3PA 3p% FTA FT% TR AS ST TO BK PF ATO PTS
AVERAGE (77) 62 1494 116 454 15 339 34 798 37 75 17 26 2 28 240 137
AVERAGE (58) 64 1656 152 472 17 351 43 801 47 39 15 23 3 30 205 184
AVERAGE (62) 67 1738 145 480 10 310 45 775 61 29 12 22 6 33 201 178
AVERAGE (73) 60 1443 124 494 05 292 49 732 85 23 11 23 9 40 211 160
AVERAGE (73) 59 1338 115 486 02 289 43 728 94 16 9 22 18 42 197 144

Year = 2000
Player GP Min FGA FG% 3PA 3p% FTA FT% TR AS ST TO BK PF ATO PTS
AVERAGE (91) 55 1313 123 422 31 345 31 784 36 66 15 25 2 28 212 138
AVERAGE (87) 56 1435 131 432 34 365 36 807 44 32 13 20 4 29 184 155
AVERAGE (81) 57 1400 126 449 23 357 38 758 63 28 12 21 7 34 189 150
AVERAGE(100)54 1297 119 471 07 323 43 724 88 21 10 23 10 39 196 146
AVERAGE (80) 52 1083 109 481 03 344 41 675 96 15 8 21 20 47 196 133

Year = 2010
AVERAGE (96) 58 1438 125 439 35 359 33 798 36 60 13 25 2 26 213 149
AVERAGE (81) 58 1450 126 437 42 359 34 796 43 30 11 18 4 26 190 152
AVERAGE (90) 56 1388 124 448 34 350 37 774 58 23 11 18 6 28 189 152
AVERAGE (88) 56 1295 124 488 14 343 40 741 86 20 10 19 9 38 209 156
AVERAGE (85) 53 1174 106 515 06 344 38 675 98 18 8 20 17 40 221 137

Current Year
AVERAGE (91) 30 751 132 427 42 344 35 803 40 62 14 26 3 27 208 156
AVERAGE(107)29 699 130 424 49 356 33 785 42 32 13 20 4 27 180 154
AVERAGE (84) 29 664 116 434 42 353 29 764 56 23 11 16 5 27 185 138
AVERAGE(108)30 657 124 478 21 343 36 711 87 22 10 18 10 35 206 151
AVERAGE (71)29 640 110 517 02 329 38 688 108 18 08 21 17 40 220 141


Oh, the column marked ATO is not the assist to turnover ratio - its the ratio of the number of good things a player (or group of players) do on offense to the number of bad things they do on offense - and the decimal point is after the first digit, unlike the other columns.
Edit: trying to get the columns to line up better - as impossible as ever, of course.

 

[Covert Rain]

Here are some league summary stats from over the years so you can see how the game has changed - and not changed. The biggest change is the volume of three point shots - it has roughly tripled since 1990. PFs shoot 4 times as many now as they did then but so do SFs. For PFs 1 shot out of 6 is a 3, for PGs, SGs and SFs, 1 shot out of 3 is a 3 pointer. Centers are clearly lagging behind as they haven't increased their volume of 3's at all. Other than that the stats do not show a whole lot of evolution and the position labels mean as much now as they did then.

Averages by position, in the order PG, SG, SF, PF, C.
Stats are per 36 minutes. Stats have implicit decimal point before last digit.
Year = 1990
Player GP Min FGA FG% 3PA 3p% FTA FT% TR AS ST TO BK PF ATO PTS
AVERAGE (77) 62 1494 116 454 15 339 34 798 37 75 17 26 2 28 240 137
AVERAGE (58) 64 1656 152 472 17 351 43 801 47 39 15 23 3 30 205 184
AVERAGE (62) 67 1738 145 480 10 310 45 775 61 29 12 22 6 33 201 178
AVERAGE (73) 60 1443 124 494 05 292 49 732 85 23 11 23 9 40 211 160
AVERAGE (73) 59 1338 115 486 02 289 43 728 94 16 9 22 18 42 197 144

Year = 2000
Player GP Min FGA FG% 3PA 3p% FTA FT% TR AS ST TO BK PF ATO PTS
AVERAGE (91) 55 1313 123 422 31 345 31 784 36 66 15 25 2 28 212 138
AVERAGE (87) 56 1435 131 432 34 365 36 807 44 32 13 20 4 29 184 155
AVERAGE (81) 57 1400 126 449 23 357 38 758 63 28 12 21 7 34 189 150
AVERAGE(100)54 1297 119 471 07 323 43 724 88 21 10 23 10 39 196 146
AVERAGE (80) 52 1083 109 481 03 344 41 675 96 15 8 21 20 47 196 133

Year = 2010
AVERAGE (96) 58 1438 125 439 35 359 33 798 36 60 13 25 2 26 213 149
AVERAGE (81) 58 1450 126 437 42 359 34 796 43 30 11 18 4 26 190 152
AVERAGE (90) 56 1388 124 448 34 350 37 774 58 23 11 18 6 28 189 152
AVERAGE (88) 56 1295 124 488 14 343 40 741 86 20 10 19 9 38 209 156
AVERAGE (85) 53 1174 106 515 06 344 38 675 98 18 8 20 17 40 221 137

Current Year
AVERAGE (91) 30 751 132 427 42 344 35 803 40 62 14 26 3 27 208 156
AVERAGE(107)29 699 130 424 49 356 33 785 42 32 13 20 4 27 180 154
AVERAGE (84) 29 664 116 434 42 353 29 764 56 23 11 16 5 27 185 138
AVERAGE(108)30 657 124 478 21 343 36 711 87 22 10 18 10 35 206 151
AVERAGE (71)29 640 110 517 02 329 38 688 108 18 08 21 17 40 220 141


Oh, the column marked ATO is not the assist to turnover ratio - its the ratio of the number of good things a player (or group of players) do on offense to the number of bad things they do on offense - and the decimal point is after the first digit, unlike the other columns.
Edit: trying to get the columns to line up better - as impossible as ever, of course.

No doubt 3 point shooting has picked up. However, I was looking for something more along the lines of shot selection by position. There are a couple sites you can check those stats out. I might do it when I get a chance because for instance you here constantly how the midrange game has disappeared in the NBA. So, they might be shooting more 3's but that could also mean they are shooting more around the bucket as well. It can't be that all 3 have disappeared and based on those status even with the increase in 3 point shots, the rest have to made somewhere.

I am pretty curious myself now. I might put some stats together this week if I get a chance.

 

[sunsfan88]

Jeff Hornacek's dream team for the Suns:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlSuqrGSWAk

 

[Errntknght]

No doubt 3 point shooting has picked up. However, I was looking for something more along the lines of shot selection by position. There are a couple sites you can check those stats out. I might do it when I get a chance because for instance you here constantly how the midrange game has disappeared in the NBA. So, they might be shooting more 3's but that could also mean they are shooting more around the bucket as well. It can't be that all 3 have disappeared and based on those status even with the increase in 3 point shots, the rest have to made somewhere.

I am pretty curious myself now. I might put some stats together this week if I get a chance.

The shot selections were by position. In each group of 5 the first row is PGs, 2nd row is SGs etc They don't differentiate among the different 2 point shots, the way you'd like, of course

 

[Covert Rain]

The shot selections were by position. In each group of 5 the first row is PGs, 2nd row is SGs etc They don't differentiate among the different 2 point shots, the way you'd like, of course

No I got that part. What I meant was detailed shot selection. Not just regular FG versus 3PT FG. It will take some work but you can compile shots in the paint, in the lane versus midrange etc. There are a couple sites who track that.

Update: Check this out. http://peterbeshai.com/buckets/app/#/leagueView/2014?chartType=heatmap

It appears that PF/Center do in fact play around the rim more often than not. This is the entire NBA. It also appears when you check out that sight that even guards either shoot from 3 or in the paint the most often. It does appears that what analyst have been saying for years (midrange game has disappeared in the NBA is true).

Big Men in the NBA:

 

[Budden]

How many power forwards can you name that live by the post-up? Zach Randolph and beyond that pretty much nobody.
And even Randolph takes a lot of midrange jumpers.

Gasol, Nowitzki, Amare, Griffin, Aldridge, Markieff, Ibaka etc their bread and butter are jumpshots and/or playing high post away from the basket.

Amare Stoudemire lives by the post-up.

 

[slinslin]

Barkley has clearly lost it completely, nothing the fat guy says can be taken seriously



Sad to see how bitter this guy is. Clearly he has a hard time that nobody would even entertain the possibility of employing Barkley in a management role.

The Chuckster on analytics: "Just some crap some people who were really smart made up to try to get in the game cause they had no talent"

"A bunch of guys who ain't never played the game and they never got the girls in HS and they just want to get in the game"

Charles Barkley needs to realize
1. Basketball Talent does not mean that you understand the game at a higher level (Michael Jordan and the Wizards/Bobcats, Magic Johnson coaching)
2. Relative to those smart guys Barkley might not even have been more talented, just lucky enough to be big enough and athletic enough to play in the NBA.

TNT better fine him for what he said. He is nothing more than a clown anyway. Unfortunately Shaq is almost as bad while being less funny.

 

[Covert Rain]

Barkley has clearly lost it completely, nothing the fat guy says can be taken seriously

Sad to see how bitter this guy is. Clearly he has a hard time that nobody would even entertain the possibility of employing Barkley in a management role.

Charles Barkley needs to realize
1. Basketball Talent does not mean that you understand the game at a higher level (Michael Jordan and the Wizards/Bobcats, Magic Johnson coaching)
2. Relative to those smart guys Barkley might not even have been more talented, just lucky enough to be big enough and athletic enough to play in the NBA.

TNT better fine him for what he said. He is nothing more than a clown anyway. Unfortunately Shaq is almost as bad while being less funny.

He took his point to an extreme for sure but he has a point. People use analytics to place sports bets all the time but there are not very many people getting rich doing it. We see guys spout off about PER like it's the be all end all and it doesn't necessarily translate to reality on the court.

Also, a guy can be talented, understand the game but not be able to coach for example or manage the business aspects because it's not their talent.

I have always maintained that stats are just indicators but the reason you have sites like 82 games and analysts like Hollinger coming up with all these fancy calculations is because there is a huge gap in analytics and stats (or the X-factor if you will). So these guys try to fill that gap because they know that analytics isn't the be all end all.

Did Barkley take it to far by totally dismissing them? OK. He still has a valid point. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a stat line after missing a game and go "wow...he played really well". Then find out it was mostly end of the game garbage time. What about guys that have been buried on rosters with horrible stats and because of freak injury gets a chance and surprises the league? According to analytics those players should never have sniffed a court. What about the draft? It's a massive crap shoot and primarily relies on scouting and analytics. There are plenty of examples.

 

[slinslin]

Did Barkley take it to far by totally dismissing them? OK. He still has a valid point. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a stat line after missing a game and go "wow...he played really well". Then find out it was mostly end of the game garbage time. What about guys that have been buried on rosters with horrible stats and because of freak injury gets a chance and surprises the league? According to analytics those players should never have sniffed a court. What about the draft? It's a massive crap shoot and primarily relies on scouting and analytics. There are plenty of examples.

There are advanced stats that take all that into account and besides that people that understand an use them are smart enough to recognize that stats without a decent sample size are meaningless.

What about the draft? Advanced stats and analytics have actually proven to give a better forecast than traditional methods and are already HEAVILY used.

 

[elindholm]

What about the draft? Advanced stats and analytics have actually proven to give a better forecast than traditional methods and are already HEAVILY used.

Huh? If anything, actual drafts correspond even less well to mock drafts than they used to. Everyone has the same access to advanced stats, so if analytics were dictating draft decisions, we'd see less disparity, not more.

 

[Covert Rain]

Huh? If anything, actual drafts correspond even less well to mock drafts than they used to. Everyone has the same access to advanced stats, so if analytics were dictating draft decisions, we'd see less disparity, not more.

Yep, and more teams fail in the draft than succeed. Everyone uses stats to try and find the diamond in the crowd that nobody else sees. There are guys in the NFL that were draft in the 5th round that are hall of famers because analytics told most teams to stay away for MULTIPLE rounds.

 

[Phrazbit]

Analytics are not perfect but they're a really powerful tool. And I'd hardly say mock drafts vs analytics prove or disprove anything.

I like Barkley, I think he is funny, but thats the key word, funny. Most of what he says on that show from an evaluation standpoint is pure nonsense, and rants like that one the other night are embarrassing. If you're dismissing analytics entirely then you're probably one of the worst teams around basketball right now, I have not looked up which teams do and don't use them heavily, but off the top of my head I know the Grizz are huuuge on analytics, I know the Kings dismiss them... as did the Lance Blanks Suns.

 

[sunsfan88]

He took his point to an extreme for sure but he has a point. People use analytics to place sports bets all the time but there are not very many people getting rich doing it. We see guys spout off about PER like it's the be all end all and it doesn't necessarily translate to reality on the court.

Also, a guy can be talented, understand the game but not be able to coach for example or manage the business aspects because it's not their talent.

I have always maintained that stats are just indicators but the reason you have sites like 82 games and analysts like Hollinger coming up with all these fancy calculations is because there is a huge gap in analytics and stats (or the X-factor if you will). So these guys try to fill that gap because they know that analytics isn't the be all end all.

Did Barkley take it to far by totally dismissing them? OK. He still has a valid point. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a stat line after missing a game and go "wow...he played really well". Then find out it was mostly end of the game garbage time. What about guys that have been buried on rosters with horrible stats and because of freak injury gets a chance and surprises the league? According to analytics those players should never have sniffed a court. What about the draft? It's a massive crap shoot and primarily relies on scouting and analytics. There are plenty of examples.

Well put. I don't think stats should be disregarded completely but I don't think its a good idea to use stats mostly to make basketball decisions. There are just too many variables that stats don't account for some times.

 

[95pro]

i wonder if the rockets solely used analytics to build their team. maybe that's why he's ripping them.

 

[mojorizen7]

I'm too old school for analytics...but i'm not too cool to listen to Charles Barkley drop truth bombs about bad defense. Chuck knows what bad defense looks like first hand

 

[sunsfan88]

The Phoenix Suns have a glut of guards in the backcourt and Ryan McDonough admitted the team's balance is slightly off.

"I think our roster balance is a little off, and that's my fault," McDonough said Wedneday on Arizona Sports 98.7 FM. "We are a little too backcourt heavy, especially in terms of guys who, you know, I think you'd define primarily as scorers in the backcourt.

"So I think at some point we'll need to balance that out, try to get a little more size, a little more frontcourt scoring and rebounding."

The Suns are in the playoff picture but have lost seven of their last 10 games.

"At the same time it's a challenge because we do have talented players, they've all had success individually and team success in the NBA," McDonough said, "so those are some of the decisions we'll kind of mull over the next week or so and we'll see where we are on the 19th next week."

Looks like McD is agreeing with Chuck in his assessment.

 

[slinslin]

Yep, and more teams fail in the draft than succeed. Everyone uses stats to try and find the diamond in the crowd that nobody else sees. There are guys in the NFL that were draft in the 5th round that are hall of famers because analytics told most teams to stay away for MULTIPLE rounds.

Draft Tools can't be 100% accurate because the analysis is trying to PREDICT the future development and not what a player is worth right now.

Going back in drafts and applying the metrics to the prospects shows better results than the actual drafts and nowadays every single team in the league uses these analytics.

Memphis picking Jordan Adams and San Antonio picking Kyle Anderson are two prime examples of teams high on analytics picking players that failed the eyeball test but passed the analytics test.

San Antonio, Memphis, Houston they are all high on analytics. Without analytics San Antonio does not win their last championships. Unlike what Barkley believes Miami also used analytics to built their team and you can't just throw together 3 big names and be a championship contender (Nash, Kobe, Howard).

 

[Covert Rain]

Draft Tools can't be 100% accurate because the analysis is trying to PREDICT the future development and not what a player is worth right now.

Going back in drafts and applying the metrics to the prospects shows better results than the actual drafts and nowadays every single team in the league uses these analytics.

Memphis picking Jordan Adams and San Antonio picking Kyle Anderson are two prime examples of teams high on analytics picking players that failed the eyeball test but passed the analytics test.

San Antonio, Memphis, Houston they are all high on analytics. Without analytics San Antonio does not win their last championships. Unlike what Barkley believes Miami also used analytics to built their team and you can't just throw together 3 big names and be a championship contender (Nash, Kobe, Howard).

Can you please provide me a link that says analytics was a bigger factor than simply scouting a player and doing exactly what Barkley said and making it a decision about the player versus stats?

As I stated stats might be an indicator but I bet scouting and watching tape had way more to do with drafting some of the said above versus some person looking at a stat line.

 

[slinslin]

So you think it is coincidence that Memphis a team heavy on analytic use picked a player in the middle of the first round that was projected as one of the overall best 5 picks in the entire draft while the "eyeball scouts" barely had that player as a second round prospect before the draft?

It was only later that some mocks moved Jordan Adams up when mockers realized how well he rated.

And then Memphis picked Jarnell Stokes in the beginning of the 2nd round. Another player who ranked a lot higher on analytics compared to scouting reports.

If in these cases it was right decision who knows, considering very very few rookies play meaningful minutes especially on decent teams.

Point is if you apply these analytics on past drafts, the rankings of the players is closer to how we would rank them in hindsight than the actual draft and if GMs back then had access to those advanced analytics those drafts would have gone different.

Obviously analytics is not ALL but certainly it is the main and most reliable way to analyze player production and efficiency. Baseball seems to prove the value, basketball is no different.

PPG is also a statistic, something Barkley obviously believes him since according to him allowing 118 raw points is a definite sign of a bad defensive team.
Barkley's problem with advanced stats is obviously that he does not understand them.

 

[Covert Rain]

So you think it is coincidence that Memphis a team heavy on analytic use picked a player in the middle of the first round that was projected as one of the overall best 5 picks in the entire draft while the "eyeball scouts" barely had that player as a second round prospect before the draft?

It was only later that some mocks moved Jordan Adams up when mockers realized how well he rated.

And then Memphis picked Jarnell Stokes in the beginning of the 2nd round. Another player who ranked a lot higher on analytics compared to scouting reports.

If in these cases it was right decision who knows, considering very very few rookies play meaningful minutes especially on decent teams.

Point is if you apply these analytics on past drafts, the rankings of the players is closer to how we would rank them in hindsight than the actual draft and if GMs back then had access to those advanced analytics those drafts would have gone different.

Obviously analytics is not ALL but certainly it is the main and most reliable way to analyze player production and efficiency. Baseball seems to prove the value, basketball is no different.

PPG is also a statistic, something Barkley obviously believes him since according to him allowing 118 raw points is a definite sign of a bad defensive team.
Barkley's problem with advanced stats is obviously that he does not understand them.

So you can't provide a link. Just because a team uses stats to do an analysis doesn't mean it was the primary reason a player was chosen. Is there some team that is stat crazy out there? I have no doubt. Is it the primary reason every team drafts a player or is it scouting?

I don't think he was right about completely dismissing stats but he is absolutely right that the importance of stats being overblown because as I and other stated there are a bunch of examples where they are misleading. Not to mention you can't measure personality in a stat either which has led to many a player imploding in sports or never getting over the hump.

Again...not arguing to dismiss stats only that he had a point that they are not the be all end all. I like stats. I have worked in Business Intelligence for years and I love looking and crunching the numbers. There is definitely something to them but it's not the holy grail that you make it out to be.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Forest through the trees my friends. This isnt the end game. This is an ASSET and FLEXIBILITY game right now and we are better positioned then almost every other team in the league to make a BIG leap - provided we can add the star forwards we need.

But McD has one more offseason to bring in that big fish. Otherwise "the plan" starts to lose all credibility.

The fact that we are competing for playoffs while remaking the team on the fly is a testament to McD, Hornacek, and the staff. But thats not what they are trying to do. They are trying to be contenders. And that will take another off season. At least.

 

[sunsfan88]

For all the hate that Chuck gets, looks like he was right on the money

Are y'all trying to get the record for the most point guards in the NBA?" TNT analyst Charles Barkley said to Bickley and Marotta on Arizona Sports 98.7 FM last July.

This, of course, was in response to the Phoenix Suns, who already had Goran Dragic under contract and were negotiating with restricted free agent Eric Bledsoe on a new deal, signing free agent Isaiah Thomas to a four-year contract.

"I have no idea what they're doing, to be honest with you."

 

[Sci Fi]

Forest through the trees my friends. This isnt the end game. This is an ASSET and FLEXIBILITY game right now and we are better positioned then almost every other team in the league to make a BIG leap - provided we can add the star forwards we need.

But McD has one more offseason to bring in that big fish. Otherwise "the plan" starts to lose all credibility.

The fact that we are competing for playoffs while remaking the team on the fly is a testament to McD, Hornacek, and the staff. But thats not what they are trying to do. They are trying to be contenders. And that will take another off season. At least.

Hmm. So much for that thought.

 

[sunsfan88]

Charles Barkley of TNT weighed in on the Dragic deal during Thursday night's broadcast. He didn't like it, and hasn't been a fan of how McDonough has handled his personnel going back to last summer.

"They're in the exact same situation. They screwed up their team this summer bringing in Isaiah Thomas," Barkley said. "They knew Bledsoe is a good player, they had to pay Dragic at the end of this season and then they bring in Thomas and draft a point guard (Tyler Ennis).

"They screwed this entire thing up. And I like Brandon Knight, he's a good player, but he's just like Dragic and Thomas. So now you've still got a bunch of little guys out there playing. They just really screwed up."

Chuck is not a fan of these moves.

 

[Covert Rain]

Chuck is not a fan of these moves.

I don't think he is wrong either. We still have two PG's playing in our starting lineup. Maybe Knight can be completely converted to a SG. I don't know but on paper it sure still looks like we are dependent on a guy playing out of position.