Why are Anthony Edwards impact metrics so poor relative to his hype?

[Movics]

where did this anti-edwards campaign from thunder fans come from?

Fear

[An Unbiased Fan]

Spreadsheet crowd will try to criticize him regardless like they did with Kobe

[Sealab2024]

Spreadsheet enthusiasts in shambles

Eye testers win again

[Jasen777]

Spreadsheet enthusiasts in shambles

Eye testers win again

My spreadsheet says he had a great game.

[Hobo4President]

His impact metrics aren't poor, he just doesn't play as well in the regular season as he does in the playoffs. In the regular season he had a +5.5 +/- and a net on/off of +2.8. In the playoffs that's jumped to a +/- of +14 and a net on/off of +10.6. We see the same with his advanced and his raw box stats, they improve in the playoffs and they have every year he has made the playoffs.

[TimberKat]

where did this anti-edwards campaign from thunder fans come from?

See my post

[brutalitops]

Spreadsheet crowd will try to criticize him regardless like they did with Kobe

Spreadsheet
Clean sweep
Wolves in 4

Can't downplay analytics but I mean he plays in an ultra defensive team and had the only other Good shot creator go down with a knee halfway during the season. Inefficiency will show because he bears the brunt of offense, but they also work a LOT harder defensively. If wolves wanted to play 140-121 wins and trade Gobert and McDaniels and grab 3 shooters who cant sniff the top half of NBA defenders. he's gonna probably look better having more options and less coverage. Analytics is fine but most posters here are not using it in any sort of context. Hence the heap of **** opinions.

[TimberKat]

Face of the league. Superstar. Best SG in the league. Things I’m seeing a lot right now. He’s basically the league darling right now. People talk about him like he’s the next Jordan. You even have insane people trying to partake in revisionist history and saying he’s in the same tier this season as Luka and SGA.

But something I find odd is he’s not well liked by impact metrics. SGA and Luka for example are .250-.270 WS/48 players which is HOF/MVP tier. Ant is at .130, which is literally not even all star tier basically. Normally players at that level are high end starters, to low end all stars. .100 is a league average player, .150 area is typically an all star, .200 is a superstar, .250-.300 is usually a first ballot HOF/Multiple time MVP (guys like MJ, Jokic, Wilt, LeBron, KG etc).

EPM has SGA and Luka at #2 and #3 for example with 8.8 and 7.9. Edwards is at 4.2 which is ranked 22nd in the league after guys like FVV. Why is his hype/reputation so much better than his impact metrics?

What metrics are we talking about here? EPM? Could someone even explain what that metric trying to say and how they arrive at it? Why is Hartenstein rank 14 ahead of Tatum, Lillard, Fox, and Davis? How do you explain Ant rank 22, Gobert at 44, and Towns at 50 managed to have the 3rd best record in the Western conference just one game behind OKC? If your metric is telling you Ant is closer to Jalen William instead of SGA, it's time to look for something else.

We all know Ant is a work in progress with super physique. He has gotten much better as the season progress until the incredible performance in the playoffs. His 3pt shooting took a deep dive after dislocating his figure on a dunk. Also general bang up the last couple months. You can see the trend in the game logs. Look at the season as a whole, he is a top 20 player with the potential to be top 10 (or top 5) next year.

So if you want to build around Hartenstein, I am sure the NYK will be willing to trade him to OKC for Holmgren + 2 1st. I will stick with building around the low EPM Ant.

If a metric is saying FVV is ranked higher than edwards, would the correct question be why is edwards less impactful than FVV, or should the question be is this stat or metric flawed to the point where it would rank fvv higher than edwards?

We don't know how EPM is calculated but do know it has flaws and know it should not be used to rank players. if I use the layment's term of "impactful", than the model is incorrect. Remember it also has Hartenstein at 14. Could you explain that one? However, If you figure out the calculations and has the definition of "impactful" within the model, then we can have a more meaningful discussion. I will quote a couple previous post along the same line:

GeorgeMarcus wrote: Idk if EPM is worthwhile because I'm not sure how it's calculated, but I will say this: true +/- driven stats like RAPM shouldn't be looked at as player rankings. They describe how effective a player is in his role/in the context of his supporting cast.

Another: "Estimated Plus-Minus is called such because any all-in-one metric is simply trying to estimate a player's true value which is unknown. Although RAPM-based metrics are much better than raw plus-minus/net rating, it is still only an estimate, and a thorough analysis of a player should accompany the use of EPM, such as with other stats and video. The role and context of a player should be considered as well"

Finally, Anything use +/- as the foundation is likely inconsistent. Check out the +/- of the Wolves vs DEN game. Can you tell me what impact J Holiday has in the game? The guy with the highest +/- for DEN.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Spreadsheet enthusiasts in shambles

Eye testers win again

Not really?

His postseason impact metrics match the eye test. It's really his sustainability over a RS which has been the question, and what he might look like over an extended postseason run. First game against Denver certainly looked great, though.

Don’t try to bring in nuance it’s going to hurt some heads.

[Johnny Firpo]

Pretty easy answer, because he wasn't nearly this good in the regular season. Let's see if he can keep this up.

[zimpy27]

His impact metrics aren't poor, he just doesn't play as well in the regular season as he does in the playoffs. In the regular season he had a +5.5 +/- and a net on/off of +2.8. In the playoffs that's jumped to a +/- of +14 and a net on/off of +10.6. We see the same with his advanced and his raw box stats, they improve in the playoffs and they have every year he has made the playoffs.

Makes one wonder if he doesn't care much about the RS.. it's not really explainable why he'd be much better in the postseason.

[thinktank]

Spreadsheet enthusiasts in shambles

Eye testers win again

Not really?

His postseason impact metrics match the eye test. It's really his sustainability over a RS which has been the question, and what he might look like over an extended postseason run. First game against Denver certainly looked great, though.

Don’t try to bring in nuance it’s going to hurt some heads.

LOL. The Ant haters aren’t the ones bringing nuance.

The nuance is that Ant has a completely different gear to shift into when it matters.

We’ve been saying that, and Ant has been showing it, ever since he got into the playoffs.

You either understand that or you don’t.

[Baseline81]

Makes one wonder if he doesn't care much about the RS.. it's not really explainable why he'd be much better in the postseason.

Several Minnesota posters have already pointed this out. He coasts in the regular season, "getting up" for certain matchups and then against lesser opponents "plays down." We'll see if this continues in the future...

With that said, it doesn't negate Edwards being one of the best players in the game, and why the national media has been behind the 8-ball and only now trying to catch up.

[Shaka_Zulu]

His impact metrics aren't poor, he just doesn't play as well in the regular season as he does in the playoffs. In the regular season he had a +5.5 +/- and a net on/off of +2.8. In the playoffs that's jumped to a +/- of +14 and a net on/off of +10.6. We see the same with his advanced and his raw box stats, they improve in the playoffs and they have every year he has made the playoffs.

Makes one wonder if he doesn't care much about the RS.. it's not really explainable why he'd be much better in the postseason.

Its not that he doesnt care, think its combination of still learning how to fo focus/mature, trying to be selfless in minor games vs sub .500 teams and thinking I just feed my teammates for this or that game, and focus on bringing it hard for the tougher matchups of that week. I seen it happen to often not think by now it was deliberate by him, and not just poor performance.



It was mainly when KAT when down for a month that he realized he needs to bring it every single game to get the wins, because previously in his young mindset he was thinking most likely he is not needed for this tanking team we have enough weapons etc.



Also even if he tries hard in every regular season game, this is a kid who is super motivated to bring it when the lights are the brightest. Like a mini-Butler, because even if we lost both series, the elevation of focus, aggression and ferocious scoring he had vs Grizzlies and Nuggets in past 2 years playoffs, it was like a total different player, a mental switch that said its on lets get it.

We still lost, but he was giving them 30-40 games consistently. Almost no off nights. Only truly awful no show game he has had in playoff setting, was play in game vs Lakers last year, and he was sick/semi injured for that.

[tsherkin]

LOL. The Ant haters aren’t the ones bringing nuance.

The nuance is that Ant has a completely different gear to shift into when it matters.

We’ve been saying that, and Ant has been showing it, ever since he got into the playoffs.

You either understand that or you don’t.

TBF, it's important to distinguish between people who have been saying "let's see it over a RS/over a slightly larger sample" and people who are actively campaigning with the idea that he isn't very good. When people make comments about "the spreadsheet crowd," they aren't participating in conversation in any kind of good faith.

Always so frustrating when people jump straight to pejoratives, right?

Don’t try to bring in nuance it’s going to hurt some heads.

Some will listen. Ant is a very interesting player, and that comes with fandom. "Fan" is largely accepted to be a shortening of "fanatic," and that does show through at times, doesn't it?

But Edwards IS playing very well in the playoffs. And this is now the second round. Denver isn't exactly a defensive titan, but they were top 8 in the regular season and one can move the goalpost for when he's to be considered good only so many times. 20 games? Seems a reasonable threshold, as that's a total which lines up with a title run. 16 games? That's Trae Young's first postseason, over which he was a +6.8 OBPM player. Ant, of course, is visibly and statistically superior to Trae Young, so that's really more a remark that a lot can change after 15 games or so, which is all a lot of people are trying to say.

It is also worth noting that Edwards is shooting 43.6% on 7.8 3PA/g, and that so far this postseason, he is also shooting 69.2% from 16-23 feet, but shooting under 67% inside the RA. So there is some space to look at that and say "yeah, we're going to see regression coming eventually." How much? Who knows? He's doing a better job getting looks in closer, incrementally better each postseason so far. And he's been better at the line. And he IS also baseline a pretty good 3pt shooter in volume, so the drop probably won't be TOO brutal. And even if it comes this series, there's a chance they beat Denver if the Nuggets keep playing this poorly.

[tsherkin]

Makes one wonder if he doesn't care much about the RS.. it's not really explainable why he'd be much better in the postseason.

Several Minnesota posters have already pointed this out. He coasts in the regular season, "getting up" for certain matchups and then against lesser opponents "plays down." We'll see if this continues in the future...

With that said, it doesn't negate Edwards being one of the best players in the game, and why the national media has been behind the 8-ball and only now trying to catch up.

It's an interesting phenomenon, for sure. Great players in the past have been great players in the RS AND in the playoffs, so it remains a point of discussion with him, and there is also some degree of SIGNIFICANT difference in his shooting past about 10 feet come the playoffs which will likely regress at some point. But for now, he's murdering it and of course his defense has nothing to do with shooting streaks or anything like that. And his playmaking is the same right now as it was in the RS, another element of improvement we've seen in his game. And he also set a career-high at the line in the RS, which was another marker for likely-sustainable improvement, as it was his first time at 79%+ (and indeed, almost 84%). Career-high RS FTr, yadda yadda. Even bleh'g it up in the RS relative to the top tier in the league offensively, he's showing all sorts of really interesting developments. And he's 22 years old, so there's that, too. He's definitely exciting, he definitely has huge potential. He's definitely showing some of it right now. He definitely just beat the crap out of the Nuggets in the opener.

So even on a rudimentary box score pass without watching games, it should be clear that he is on the rise. And obviously he's been killing it in the playoffs for 3 years now, which is another positive indicator. And the defense is yet another positive. And and and and. I think there's no space not to respect his potential, it's just that some people are getting a little ahead of themselves with where he is right this moment without him having let it out over a meatier sample.

Dude's obviously an excellent player, I think some are just waiting for it to be real, because we've seen this dance before with others and sometimes it doesn't stick. It probably will with him, but there's always going to be pushback until it's been done over a more reasonable sample size.

[KembaWalker]

Spreadsheet enthusiasts in shambles

Eye testers win again

Not really?

His postseason impact metrics match the eye test. It's really his sustainability over a RS which has been the question, and what he might look like over an extended postseason run. First game against Denver certainly looked great, though.

Don’t try to bring in nuance it’s going to hurt some heads.

lol @ the RealGM spreadsheet brigade being the ones to offer nuance or hurt heads. Literally anyone can sort a spreadsheet with 2 minutes of training or pick a higher number from a list. In 50 years someone future RealGM PC board guy will be like “Ants BPM was lower than Fred Van Vleet, are we sure this guy was even good??” They do it to Kobe now, all day, every day

[The-Stallion70]

Face of the league. Superstar. Best SG in the league. Things I’m seeing a lot right now. He’s basically the league darling right now. People talk about him like he’s the next Jordan. You even have insane people trying to partake in revisionist history and saying he’s in the same tier this season as Luka and SGA.

But something I find odd is he’s not well liked by impact metrics. SGA and Luka for example are .250-.270 WS/48 players which is HOF/MVP tier. Ant is at .130, which is literally not even all star tier basically. Normally players at that level are high end starters, to low end all stars. .100 is a league average player, .150 area is typically an all star, .200 is a superstar, .250-.300 is usually a first ballot HOF/Multiple time MVP (guys like MJ, Jokic, Wilt, LeBron, KG etc).

EPM has SGA and Luka at #2 and #3 for example with 8.8 and 7.9. Edwards is at 4.2 which is ranked 22nd in the league after guys like FVV. Why is his hype/reputation so much better than his impact metrics?

Advanced stats imo in basketball are just inconsistent in terms of telling you what they intend to tell you, especially all encompassing ones like Winshares or PER.

They are literally just formulas and these formulas are made up on other raw numbers i believe.

I do not know for sure but something like PER tends to favor bigs because it weights usage rate and ts% heavily, so I have heard.

I have been to a scouting conference and they basically said that it is good to know these things but they are just a piece of the puzzle when it comes to evaluating.

[thinktank]

Read on Twitter

Just enjoy it.

[tsherkin]

lol @ the RealGM spreadsheet brigade being the ones to offer nuance or hurt heads. Literally anyone can sort a spreadsheet with 2 minutes of training or pick a higher number from a list. In 50 years someone future RealGM PC board guy will be like “Ants BPM was lower than Fred Van Vleet, are we sure this guy was even good??” They do it to Kobe now, all day, every day

But again, this is a frustrating generalization. There are plenty of people who author appropriate nuance while still making use of statistics. And even with Kobe, the ones who really go after him are mostly making a bunch of errors in the process. Or, as is the case with some, refusing to acknowledge positive data points when they do come up.

Like, statistically, Kobe was the best isolation scorer of his era, and in his prime was a +3% rTS guy. He had 9 years of >= +5 OBPM, good RAPM scores, correlated well with strong team offense, etc, etc, etc, etc. There's actually a fairly strong and well-articulated argument for Kobe from a statistical standpoint. 2006-2010, Kobe had the 5th-highest RAPM in the league over that span at +4.26. It was behind Lebron, Wade, Garnett and Duncan. That run from 08 to 10 had him at 5th, 6th and 5th.

So like, even in the process of you being derogatory towards those who like to incorporate numbers, it's important to realize there are two camps involved in both sides: reasonable and unreasonable. You get people who make clownish BS arguments on both sides of things, and lumping everyone into one category isn't really helpful for quality of discourse.