Read on Twitter
THREAD:
Lots of talk today saying the Wolves don't play their starters enough. MIN plays the starters an average of 28.7 min, 24th in the NBA.
The correlation coefficient between a team's starters' min and its win % is 0.13, suggesting a very weak relationship between the two.
Lots of talk today saying the Wolves don't play their starters enough. MIN plays the starters an average of 28.7 min, 24th in the NBA.
The correlation coefficient between a team's starters' min and its win % is 0.13, suggesting a very weak relationship between the two.
Why is there a very weak relationship?
To start, better teams usually have high scoring margins, often fueled by good starting 5s (ex: LAL, LAC, MIL, DEN, PHI, UTA). Higher margins could = more garbage time, which could = less starter minutes, thus weakening the relationship.
To start, better teams usually have high scoring margins, often fueled by good starting 5s (ex: LAL, LAC, MIL, DEN, PHI, UTA). Higher margins could = more garbage time, which could = less starter minutes, thus weakening the relationship.
However, better benches can obviously also allow for starters to play less minutes. This is true for some of the above teams.
MEM has the 4th best bench in terms of +/- per @statmuse. This enables their starters to be rested to close out games. DEN is 5th, LAL 6th, MIL 8th, etc.
MEM has the 4th best bench in terms of +/- per @statmuse. This enables their starters to be rested to close out games. DEN is 5th, LAL 6th, MIL 8th, etc.
While it's easy to assume that playing your starters more minutes collectively will automatically = better on-court performance in terms of +/-, that isn't always the case.
Some teams, like GSW for example, have starting fives that are brutally bad in terms of net rating.
Some teams, like GSW for example, have starting fives that are brutally bad in terms of net rating.
Some of those same teams rely on their bench units to build leads so they can lean on one or two players in their closing lineup.
The Spurs are a great example of this. They lead the NBA in bench +/- at +275. Their starters' NRTG is -12.5 (21st %ile per Cleaning the Glass)
The Spurs are a great example of this. They lead the NBA in bench +/- at +275. Their starters' NRTG is -12.5 (21st %ile per Cleaning the Glass)
Their most common bench unit (Murray, Mills, Vassell, Gay, Poeltl) has a NRTG of +32.0 (97th percentile).
The Spurs rode DeRozan all the way home last night, largely because their bench got the party started and gained momentum in the first half of the fourth.
The Spurs rode DeRozan all the way home last night, largely because their bench got the party started and gained momentum in the first half of the fourth.
Can you make an argument that some of the Wolves better individual players (D-Lo, Beasley, Edwards, McDaniels, Reid) should play more?
Absolutely.
But, you also have to think about the *lineups* they'd play in, how they fit together, and what plays/style the team should run.
Absolutely.
But, you also have to think about the *lineups* they'd play in, how they fit together, and what plays/style the team should run.
That's currently the challenge for the Wolves, especially with all of the new pieces and young players shuffling in and out of the lineup due to injuries, COVID, and performance.
Even when KAT returns, this issue will persist, unless the rotation is set in stone and the team
Even when KAT returns, this issue will persist, unless the rotation is set in stone and the team
suddenly gets more organized on both ends of the floor.
