Isaac 3 & D Okoro - A Two Way Playing Basketball Savant

[Wham with the Right Hand]

To this point, the problem is we took a guy who has been pretty bad overall.

The problem isn't that we took one hall of fame player over the other. Which I'm sure you know.

What metrics tell you that "(at least in my mind) none have clearly outshined him to the point of asking "what the hell were the Cavs thinking?"

Okoro:

VORP: -1.7 (56th - last among qualifying 2020 draftees)
BPM: -4.9 (40th)
WS: 1.0 (20th)
Raptor: -4.2
PER: 7.9

Halliburton:

VORP: 1.4 (2nd)
BPM: 1.2 (4th)
WS: 2.6 (2nd)
Raptor: -0.9
PER: 16.2

Vassell:

VORP: 0.0 (16th)
BPM: -2.3 (20th)
WS: 1.7 (14th)
Raptor: -1.8
PER: 10.6

Okongwu:

VORP: 0.1 (12th)
BPM: -1.3 (12th)
WS: 1.9 (12th)
Raptor: -1.1
PER: 16.8

I feel like people don't look at these, don't care, both?

I personally don't dislike Isaac as much as the numbers do........but they are all, objectively, pretty bad.

He has a long way to go to be even the second best player in the tier he was drafted in. To me, that is already tracking to be Vassell. I also think, barring his health just never getting in order, that Okongwu will be a better player.

So that is inherently the calculus to me......it is possible we selected the 4th best player in a 7-8 player tier, having the first pick to select among those players. I guess that isn't a valid criticism of a GM?

In hindsight it appears Haliburton would have been the best pick for the Cavs, but six other GM's passed on him after the Cavs selected Okoro. There was a consensus that Haliburton was at the bottom of that second tier of 8 players.

I wanted Okongwu, but the unexpected opportunity to acquire Allen in mid-season plus the unexpected opportunity to draft Mobley probably means Okongwu would not have been the best choice based on subsequent developments.

Vassell averaged 5.5 points on 40.6% shooting as a rookie, so I can't go too hard on Altman for choosing Okoro over Vassell.

I just think that was an unusually weak draft and we weren't going to get the quality of player you would normally expect with the #5 pick. My expectation is that Okoro's role will be as a defensive stopper against the top 2's and 3's. As another poster pointed out, we have a lot of scoring options and can get away with having one guy on the floor to quasi-neutralize the opponent's most dangerous scorer.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I'm saying that if Okoro had been drafted by a team that didn't have such a crying need for someone, anyone to play -- a San Antonio or Atlanta, for example -- and he were playing 15-20 MPG, his numbers probably would look a lot better.

Just to piggyback off this, if Okoro was playing fewer minutes or in a reserve role where he was being asked to score more, that also would have a positive impact on his performance numbers. But JBB has been pretty upfront about his job being to do in and defend, so we're just not seeing the offense because he's not being asked.

 

[Wham with the Right Hand]

@I'mWithDan : rather than respond to your message above, I'm just gonna jump on @RchfldCavRaised 's back and say "me too." He hit most of the points I planned to address, except he said it better than I would have.

One other point worth addressing (and @The Human Q-Tip started down this road a bit in his message above): Okoro has played the second-most minutes out of the entire 2020 class (only Edwards has played more), with 2253. (Patrick Williams is a not-particularly-close third place at 2065.) That speaks to two separate issues:

1. Okoro has shown durability in his brief career. You can't help the team if you're not available. (The Dylan Windler Theorem)

2. I don't have stats to back this up at the moment, but players are going to decline in performance the more minutes they play. It makes sense a priori for several reasons. One, they're playing more minutes when fatigued. Two, they're not being confined to a 15-20 MPG role where their strengths can be maximized and their weaknesses not as exposed (as is the case with 15-20 MPG/game guys like Okongwu or Vassell). Third, it gives opposing teams that much more video to study.

I'm saying that if Okoro had been drafted by a team that didn't have such a crying need for someone, anyone to play -- a San Antonio or Atlanta, for example -- and he were playing 15-20 MPG, his numbers probably would look a lot better. (Talking about ratios here, obviously; the raw counting stats would be lower.) I'd be very careful about taking the stats compiled by Okongwu or Vassell -- numbers compiled in less than 20 minutes per game -- and assuming they will extrapolate to the 32+ MPG that Okoro has played since Day One.

So far Okoro is playing 26.7 minutes this year against 32.4 minutes last year so we may have the chance to test your theory. When Garland and Windler get back Okoro's minutes may drop a little more.

But honestly I don't think fatigue was a factor. Okoro is a stud and 32 minutes a game isn't going to affect his play, IMO.

The good thing is he got a huge amount of minutes last year so he's seen everything the NBA will throw at him. He went into the off-season knowing exactly what he needs to work on. I'm expecting to see a better Isaac Okoro this year. If we don't, then we have a problem.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Just to piggyback off this, if Okoro was playing fewer minutes or in a reserve role where he was being asked to score more, that also would have a positive impact on his performance numbers. But JBB has been pretty upfront about his job being to do in and defend, so we're just not seeing the offense because he's not being asked.

So in your estimation, minutes played is a better metric? 10 guys played 1500 or more minutes as rookies.

Here are Okoro's ranks, out of 10.

VORP: #10
BPM: #9
WS: #9

Maledon ranks behind him in both BPM and WS.

Of these 10 players, 6 of the 10 were taken after him.

You guys are describing criteria as to why these numbers are what they are.

I'm just trying to frame it here. None of it is pretty.

 

[J_J]

I like Okoro. I’m not giving up on him at all - he’s only 20 years old. Such raw player but a guy like him will develop big time in the end of year 3 or more likely year 4.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

So in your estimation, minutes played is a better metric? 10 guys played 1500 or more minutes as rookies.

No.

There isn't a metric that takes into account the role assigned to a player by a team, and the statement of mine you quoted specifically said:

if Okoro was playing fewer minutes or in a reserve role where he was being asked to score more.

He was starting alongside two guards who could score, but not defend. So to compensate for their weaknesses, Okoro was being told to focus on defense rather than scoring. Had he not been asked to focus just on defense rather than scoring -- which likely would have been the case had he been coming off the bench rather than starting alongside those two particular guys -- his offense likely would have looked much better. That's the point I was making with respect to "minutes played" -- what it meant regarding the role he was being asked to play on the court with this particular roster.

Just looking at "minutes played" or productivity per minute doesn't answer that. Again, he was in a different situation than a guy like Halliburton who was asked to start and score.

 

[CavsKermit]

I like Okoro. I’m not giving up on him at all - he’s only 20 years old. Such raw player but a guy like him will develop big time in the end of year 3 or more likely year 4.

This. If you're not willing to give a prospect like Okoro three years, don't draft him.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Just looking at "minutes played" or productivity per minute doesn't answer that. Again, he was in a different situation than a guy like Halliburton who was asked to start and score.

Sure. I was pointing out he lags every player getting the type of minutes he was. Setting Halliburton aside. Just all of these guys. This is one of the theories......he's playing more minutes, so his numbers are worse. So we isolate for that and he's still bad comparatively.

So is it just in total, you believe he was in a role no other rookie was in? And because his role was wholly unique, there is no data that correctly frames his performance or worth in his draft class thus far?

 

[CavsKermit]

Sure. I was pointing out he lags every player getting the type of minutes he was. Setting Halliburton aside. Just all of these guys. This is one of the theories......he's playing more minutes, so his numbers are worse. So we isolate for that and he's still bad comparatively.

So is it just in total, you believe he was in a role no other rookie was in? And because his role was wholly unique, there is no data that correctly frames his performance or worth in his draft class thus far?

Setting aside the 12 quarters of play this season, Okoro has been guarding the other team's best wing, if not their best player when he's been on the floor. He's also been playing alongside two guys who are below average defenders. Most of those other rookies on your list were guarding other team's bench players. Some of them were even being hidden against meh bench players. It matters.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

So is it just in total, you believe he was in a role no other rookie was in? And because his role was wholly unique, there is no data that correctly frames his performance or worth in his draft class thus far?

That is correct. There was no other rookie who played as many minutes as he did, while being asked to cover for the deficiencies of a weak defensive backcourt, and also to defer to them offensively. There is some useful data from which some limited conclusions can be drawn. But I don't believe there is any data that "correctly" frames his overall worth in that draft class.

And I'm not just trying to be obtuse. There is a reason he looked like a different player offensively in May, and it wasn't because he suddenly figured out how to score. It was because with Garland out, the team asked him to be more aggressive offensively, and take on more of the burden of scoring. And that's why I'm saying that looking at performance without consideration of what role is asking a player to play give a flawed measure of that player's ability.

Just to make a comparison in another sport, it is like looking at DPJ's metrics in college and concluding he has no NFL future.

 

[I'mWithDan]

So far Okoro is playing 26.7 minutes this year against 32.4 minutes last year so we may have the chance to test your theory. When Garland and Windler get back Okoro's minutes may drop a little more.

I'll be interested to see how his per 100 numbers shift, more than anything.

If he's believed to be a guy with elite defending potential, his stock numbers just have to get considerably better.

I'm more skeptical on most things but the correlation between STL, BLK per 100 and things like All-Defensive teams is high.

Jrue, Simmons, Butler, Thybulle, Kawhi, etc. were all top 25 in this STL metric as wing defenders. Thybulle was top 25 in both, which is silly.

The shooting may be slower to develop.......but his defensive numbers just have to get better, in a few key areas, for me to get excited about his prospects. Just relative to what I have seen through 70 games here.

 

[I'mWithDan]

And I'm not just trying to be obtuse. There is a reason he looked like a different player offensively in May, and it wasn't because he suddenly figured out how to score.

I know you aren't, I feel like we chase our tail a little here on Okoro. Maybe similar to Baker.

I do agree that one of the big underlying problems is he's also being asked to play a position he is not suited for. Which is another reason Altman should take criticism in his selection.

I don't lay most of this blame on Okoro individually.........I am generally criticizing the results thus far, of the decision our GM made. Maybe that has been unclear to this point.

Our front office made a decision to select him and play him as a 3. I don't believe anything I have seen, thus far, that intimates he is able to effectively do that. The one stretch of more effective play we saw from him was in a role that opened up, when one of the two guards our GM has committed to was injured. When that guard was healthy, he went back to this ill suited role.

I would feel better about Isaac if we moved off of one of our guards and allowed Okoro to play a role he's more suited for. My worry is we'll get 3-4 years down the road, he'll generally be in this same role and we'll really have either wasted his developmental years or possibly ruined him to a degree, making him do something he is not suited to do. Either scenario makes it more likely another team will realize any uncovered or suppressed value, as the Cavs may have moved on from him at that point.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I know you aren't, I feel like we chase our tail a little here on Okoro. Maybe similar to Baker.

I do agree that one of the big underlying problems is he's also being asked to play a position he is not suited for. Which is another reason Altman should take criticism in his selection.

I don't lay most of this blame on Okoro individually.........I am generally criticizing the results thus far, of the decision our GM made. Maybe that has been unclear to this point.

Our front office made a decision to select him and play him as a 3. I don't believe anything I have seen, thus far, that intimates he is able to effectively do that. The one stretch of more effective play we saw from him was in a role that opened up, when one of the two guards our GM has committed to was injured. When that guard was healthy, he went back to this ill suited role.

I would feel better about Isaac if we moved off of one of our guards and allowed Okoro to play a role he's more suited for. My worry is we'll get 3-4 years down the road, he'll generally be in this same role and we'll really have either wasted his developmental years or possibly ruined him to a degree, making him do something he is not suited to do. Either scenario makes it more likely another team will realize any uncovered or suppressed value, as the Cavs may have moved on from him at that point.

I actually agree with all of this. If they wanted him to develop into a three offensively, they had to do more to give him those opportunities and they simply didn't. And I do agree that he isn't suited for the 3 anyway, especially on this team as presently constructed, because of the defensive weaknesses of Sexland. It just doesn't work.

JBB essentially pigeonholed him into a much more limited role that has inhibited his development. And he may have done that out of necessity, but that doesn't change the impact on Okoro himself.

 

[Dr No]

I've tried to be positive with him. But I recently asked myself "if Okoro had not been a high draft choice what would I think of him?" My answer - "Not much". We are being hopeful with Okoro because he was a top 5 pick. If he'd been the 42nd pick and played this way, no one would be putting much hope in his future and he would not be getting meaningful minutes. He may still turn into a decent player, he will get every chance to do so (and then some), but, right now, Okoro ought to be thanking his lucky stars he was drafted where he was.

 

[Ozone]

I think where you drafted him makes him seem like an overpick a little bit, but the draft he came out of was fairly weak on true wings that were high upside players. You could have taken Vassell I guess but he is very passive, and although Halliburton clearly was more talented offensively nd the better option from that perspective, he was a bit injury prone and really weak at the time of the draft, not too mention he was never playing the 3 in the NBA which was the intent of taking Isaac imo because he has the explosiveness and defensive IQ to maybe become a high level defender against players bigger and just as athletic.
Jury still out, but the lack of spacing or more like the lack of consistent outside threats has been the story of woe for the guards last season and if others like LM continue to struggle and not help in that regard, the scrutiny will worsen