joec32033 wrote:
Value over replacement means how much value are you adding over a replacement level player (or basically a league min player). It's not the player you're replacing on your team.Ok...but would role on their respective team's still play a major part in that rating?
The best way to see VORP, IMHO, in the NBA, is to assess relative production to dollars spent.
Here's a baseball example. The Yankees, in their 90's/early 2000s dynasty phase, spent a metric ton at one point on bullpen help. Big dollars for guys like Steve Karsay and Rafael Soriano. But most baseball pundits and analysts agree that the best way to construct a bullpen is to piecemeal one together. You can build a very effective bullpen on the cheap.
This was a MoneyBall example, i.e. Chad Bradford was making under a million dollars, but was outpeforming closers and high dollar RPs at a massive clip.
In the NBA, a guy like Kevin Martin, in his prime, could get you 20 points a game. Let's say he costs 15 million a season under that production level given that time and place in the league. If you drafted a 2nd round pick, who gave you 10 points a game, but was making like a million a season, could you recalibrate your roster to find the other 10 points a game AND MORE with the 14 million instead?
ARod gives you 30 HRs and 120 RBIs a year. At 30 million a year
Scott Brosius ( except for a few career years with the Yanks, pretty much a "league average" 3B guy) gives you 20 HRs and 85 RBIs a year. At 8 million a year.
Those 10 HRs and 35 RBI, could you make up the difference using those 22 million elsewhere on the roster?
This is why COST CONTROLLED PLAYERS in the NBA on their ROOKIE CONTRACTS are so damn valuable. They are producing at a fraction of a cost to their pay rate. Devin Booker score 20 a game. He's making like 3 million a year. On the open market, he'd be a 18 million dollar a year player. You see the massive value in that?
This is why guys like Kevin Love are hard to trade now. Yes, he can light up the scoreboard. But can you find a Stretch 4 who gives you 60-70 percent of his production for 20 percent of the cost?
This is why the Noah/Rose acquisitions were so very brutal to this team. It's not just the dead 3 more years of Noah. It's the loss of Robin Lopez's 3 years of his contract and the 3 years of cost control on Jerian Grant ( yes he likely won't pan out, but this is a principle issue)
Comparing Kyrie Irving against specific players is going to be a circular argument. Its better to compare Irving to a league average point guard relative the cost difference while accounting for the difference in production.
Where this can be counter argued is that Irving is a Nike endorsed player. As such, he gets better calls on the floor by the refs. This is not something you can truly quantify in a cost to benefit ratio just looking at production and stats. In terms of marketing appeal and "star power", these are factors that make Irving more desirable even if he costs more to his production level than a cheaper and/or younger non brand name player.
7/31/2017 8:18 AM