[閒聊] Jon Brockman As a Starter？

看板Kings (沙加緬度國王)作者santabrelai時間16年前 (2010/01/08 23:02)推噓7(7推 0噓 3→)

留言10則, 7人參與討論串1/1

http://0rz.tw/YN4IX It shouldn't take much convincing to make the point that Jon Brockman deserves minutes for the Kings. He's been an incredible sparkplug at just the right times for Sacramento, becoming an instant cult favorite because of his ogrely insistance to pummel the snot out of everything with a pulse. Part of his appeal is the decade-long lack of brutes in Royal Purple. But a larger part of his appeal is that he has really, really helped the Kings when he's gotten onto the court. 關於Brockman值得上多一點這件事，我想不用多講。他是一道不可思議的閃光，會試圖將所有禁區裡的東西排除，這是我們多年來少見的兇悍風格。最重要的是，他上場真的帶給國王很多幫助。 But he's still only getting 11 minutes a night. The argument has been made, especially in the wake of the rotational decisions of Tuesday's night second half against Phoenix, that Brockman can be an effective defensive-minded counterweight to Spencer Hawes, the gifted offensive/light rebounding incumbent. But actually, adding Brockman to the starting line-up in place of Hawes might better boost the team's offense. And for that reason, along with the potential defensive aid in the form of better rebounding, I'd endorse a few starts for Brockman. 但他的上場時間還是只有11分鐘，因此我們開始有了爭議，在星期二對太陽時，我會覺得Brockman在場上的重要性比Hawes 更甚，他有願意防守的心態。我想Brockman能為我們的進攻注入活力，再加上他的防守，我願意為他的先發背書。 The one measurable skill in which Brockman has clearly excelled this season is offensive rebounding. Currently, he is grabbing 20 percent of all offensive rebound opportunities. That means for every five missed Kings shots (or reboundable missed free throws) while Brockman is on the floor, he's grabbing one of them. Do you want to know why that's nuts? Because the Warriors -- all five of them on the court at once -- rebound 21 percent of opportunities on offense. Brockman essentially does the work of 4-5 men in the category. The best team in this sector -- Memphis -- collects 33 percent of offensive rebound opportunities. Brockman gets 20 percent. Himself. Brockman最令人吃驚的一點就是他的進攻籃板，在他上場的時間裡，他捉下進攻籃板的機會是20％，也就是說五次失手裡會有一次被他給救回來。你知道這有多猛嗎？我來告訴你一些數據，金州勇士隊捉下進攻籃板的機率是21％，也就是說他一個人就快搶贏五個人，即使是進攻籃板能力最強的灰熊也不過是33％。 Offensive rebounding helps your offense. Its a huge reason the Kings are 12th in offense this season -- led by Jason Thompson and Brockman, the Kings are 4th in the league in offensive rebounding. According to previous work by Dean Oliver (now the quant analyst for the Nuggets), offensive rebounding is roughly equal to turnover rate in its effect on per-possession scoring. (Shooting is twice as important, and free throw rate is somewhat less important.) Boosting the team's offensive rebounding even more through increased minutes for Brockman (and reduced minutes for Hawes, who actually is a decent offensive rebounder himself) will help the team's offense. 進攻籃板對進攻幫助很大，這也是我們進攻還不錯的原因（JT和Brockman都很會搶）。根據Dean Oliver 的分析，進攻籃板和失誤對每一波進攻得分的影響是一樣的。（投籃次數是兩倍的重要性，而罰球比率則沒那麼重要。）想要增加進攻籃板，那我們就得增加 Brockman的上場時間（雖然Hawes 的進攻籃板也不錯，但我們可能得砍他的時間來補），這會讓球隊的進攻更好。（譯：因失誤得到的分數和因進攻籃板得到的分數以每波進攻來算後，是同樣的數據，我不知道這樣翻對不對？） But surely replacing Hawes the Multi-Talented Phenom with Brockman the Rebounder will hurt in other areas, yes? Not by my logic. Here are the current or potential starters (except Brockman) for the Kings as we enter mid-January, ranked from best-to-worse in True Shooting percentage, which is an all-encompassing shooting measure that can effectively be translated to "points per shooting possession used": 很明顯的Hawes 有較好的各方面才能，以Brockman來取代他，固然增進了防守和籃板，但會不會傷害到其他方面呢？我認為不會，以下是當過國王先發的名單，我們以TS的高低來排列，你也可以叫TS為「分數/進攻次數比」： Omri Casspi, .595 Beno Udrih, .586 Kevin Martin, .577 Donte Green, .547 Jason Thompson, .541 Tyreke Evans, .526 Andres Nocioni, .519 Spencer Hawes, .518 Yes, Hawes is last in shooting efficiency among all current or potential starters. He is the least efficient Kings starter on offense. Talented? Yes. Promising? Yes. Producing? No. If you take him out of the starting five and replace his attempts with more by the other four and his replacement (Brockman, .586, in this case), the team will get more efficient, unless the team cannot efficiently absorb the difference between Hawes's shooting frequency and Brockman's (roughly 7 FGAs per 36 minutes). 是的，Hawes 排在名單的最後面，他是我們進攻中最沒效率的球員。天分？有，前途？有，效率？無。如果將他拿掉，而用其他四人和他的替代者（我的名單是Brockman，他的TS是.586），我想進攻將會更流暢，不過球隊的其他人必須要吸收掉Hawes 多出來的出手數（Brockman平均三十六分鐘僅出手七次）。 Interestingly enough, an opposite issue is approaching: Kevin Martin will soon occupy the Donte Greene/Beno Udrih position in the starting five. (This is an assumption, but a fair one, I believe.) Martin, one of basketball's greatest weapons, should take more shots than Greene/Beno have been (13 per 36 minutes). Those shots must come from somewhere? 另外KM也即將回歸，也就是Greene、Beno的先發位將不復存在（這是我的推斷，但我想這應該沒有太多異議）。Martin是一個很棒的武器，他的出手數應該會在Greene、Beno 之上，而這些出手數從哪裡來？ Surely, the Kings can get on fine keeping Hawes in the starting five while adding Martin. Martin won't force the offense to revolve around him, and the most likely result would be everyone (Martin included) taking a few fewer shots than normal. (I imagine efficiency will go up across the board, since many teams will need to double Martin, or at least send help on his penetration.) 當然你還是可以把Hawes 留在他的位置上，KM並不會把進攻全捉來自已打，所以結果就是每個人都少投一點。（我想進攻效率應該會有所上升，因為會有不少球隊對KM進行包夾，或至少對他的進攻做些防範。） But in an optimal world, the best solution would be to allow Martin and Casspi especially, but also the high-FG% Thompson and the obviously central Evans to maintain normal usage levels while relieving the debt by adding a player who can help in so many ways in place of the least efficient starter. (Also, Brockman is a decent finisher -- 62 percent at the rim and 50 percent from 5-10 feet. He's not a Chuck Hayes level offensive drain.) 但在理想的做法是，讓Martin及Casspi把這些機會拿走，再加上高命中率的JT還有我們的中心Evans ，然後再加上一個有效率的先發者。（Brockman是個還不錯的終結者，他在籃下命中有六成二，五呎到十呎也有五成，他不是Chuck Hayes 等級的進攻者。） It's worth noting that while Brockman has helped the Kings defense -- to the tune of 4 points per 100 possessions to this point -- the team's defensive rebounding is actually worse when he plays than when he sits. I imagine this can be attributed to line-up issues (especially at point guard, where starter Evans versus back-up/Brockman partner Sergio Rodriguez is no content) but it's worth remembering that on the surface it doesn't appear adding Brockman in place of Hawes will fix the team's biggest problem. (I assure you that it can't hurt.) 值得注意的一件事情是，雖然Brockman看來對國王的防守有所助益，每一百波對手少了四分，但其實國王的防守籃板在他在場時，是更慘的狀況。我想這跟他在場時的隊友有關（Evans 和Sergio的對比），但這不會改變Brockman的先發會讓球隊更好的事。（我跟你保證這一定行。） -- 所以你支持Brockman先發？不，我絕對不支持，我覺得Brockman現在並沒有到先發的等級，他很好，但是好在一位有活力的替補，這種角色本身就有討喜的地方。他的身高無論如何只有六呎七，如果他能練出一手中距離，可能會對球隊更有幫助，但現在的他，我覺得只是上十五分鐘左右的替補球員。那為什麼翻這篇文章？因為翻譯跟喜歡球員與否並不能畫上等號，這是一個值得討論的問題。不過我是霍斯派，可能在翻譯上會有所偏好。 -- 美方網友對此也有正反爭議有人說Brockman已經有中距離了？目前他的跳投佔進攻量的兩成，而EFG 是三成七五。不過樣本數太少。有人就犯規效率來看（Brockman目前平均32分鐘會犯滿，其實還蠻高的），他可能會因為犯規早早就下去，這樣一來反而是將他的拼勁給解除。進攻籃板絕對是很髒的一件事，想要乾乾淨淨地捉下進攻籃板，你當對手是空氣人啊？所以Brockman其實做了不少壞事，不過看到對手不爽我就很開心。 -- 如果Westphal根本不想改，那麼以上都是空想。 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 125.224.128.61