Player The Uncertainty Realm of the Improved Jumpshot of Jeremy Sochan

[scott]

Jeremy was a consensus lottery pick (evidence: https://www.rookiescale.com/2022-consensus-board/). That he hasn't turned out is slightly below the normal range for a #9 overall pick, but not a complete outlier at all


Folks can get upset about the 2021 and 2022 drafts, but in reality all of those picks have more or less generally performed in the normal range outcomes for picks at those draft slots (12, 9, 20, 25). We had such an extensive history of picking guys at the end of the first (especially at picks 28 and 29) who were extreme outliers, that maybe folks have forgotten that the typical outcome for most picks outside of the Top 10 is somewhere between Rotation Player and Bust.

In 2021 and 2022 we just got slapped in the face by a dose of normal variance.

 

[PanameSpur]

First, not being a 1RP and not being a draft pick at all are two different things.
Second, Sochan ranked by stats in his draft class, which I am fully aware you just randomly dismiss because apparently it is not as accurate as your eye test:
1) 12th in minutes played
2) 12th in pts scored
3) 6th in rebounds
4) 6th in assists
5) 15th in FG%
6) 39th in 3PG%
7) 33th in FT%
8) 11th in PPG
9) 8th in RPG
10) 7th in APG
11) 21in WS
12) 38 in WS/48

I didn't put in BPM and VORP because those numbers go into the negatives and benefits either players who play on good teams, or players in the negatives who just played less.

A player without feel to the game can still be a player. Westbrook never had feel and won MVP. JR Smith had a long career and even won a title as a starter. Darius Miles, Corey Magette, Kuminga, Lamelo Ball, Trae Young, the list just goes on and on. You act like all the NBA players who ever played are these basketball geniuses but reality is that plenty of them were just athletes who does dumb things on the court. You can say these players under achieve, but to say that they can't contribute and shouldn't be drafted is just hard to justify.



And yet this season he sucked ass just so happened when those metrics and data analytics plummeted. Go figure.

BTW, it shouldn't be the only source of decision making, just that it is a big part.

Did you just compare Sochan to Westbrook JR Smith Trae etc??

what's wrong with you??

Those players have a great feel for the game, maybe too individualists but it's another topic. All the players you named can create their own shot, read situations etc

You're not making any sense with your post, you're all over the place trying to defend the undefendable with absurd comps.

You listed his draft data when precisely I was making the point of the over importance of those in the draft process and analising the potential of a prospect.

If you just look at the data Sochan look(ed) like a potential NBA player, he has the size, the mobility, showed grit etc but if you actually watch him play you notice plenty of information that aren't in the data bc only the naked eye can see them.

His decision-making, his body language, the time he makes to correct a mistake (after 4 years he still stops his dribble just when he shouldn't smh, you have to be limited intellectually at this point...), the fact that he can't create his own shot can't be highlighted by data as much as with your eyes as well, his clumsiness is also hard to see in the stats etc

The feel for the game isn't just the bbiq or (right) decision-making, it's the ability to improvise when you're off script, for that you need to be comfortable with the ball and Sochan isn't.

Then you add the work ethic, the ambition/determination, the IQ, the mental strength (when things go wrong) ... and he sucks at those too!

Lastly you said "and yet this season..." smh

Why would you want to analyze Sochan's data for this season? I mean seriously... why would you think those data would teach you anything constructive with such limited playing time and diff roles or positions etc

IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE

Stop living and dying with the data, it's only a tiny part of the picture and will never teach you anything your eyes can't see.

Stop isolating them or using small samples

I already tried to explain you many times that you don't understand how to read stats and how to use them. You misinterpret them all the time bc you still don't realize that you can LITERALLY make them say anything you want, you just have to select the ones that fit your bias.

It's a dangerous tool, it looks simple to interpret but it's a lot more complicated than it looks and can lead you to huge mistakes, statisticians will tell you that better than me.

Sochan is the same guy today that he was +3years ago, PATFO just messed up and took years to either admit it or realize it. Either an ego or competency issue basically.

 

[Exstatic]

Would have been difficult for anyone to mess up picking #1, #2 & #4? I guess they get some credit for drafting Castle.

#2 overall is a hell pit. The results there are overall lower that later picks, in the aggregate.

Teams have whiffed on all of those pick positions.

 

[Ice009]

#2 overall is a hell pit. The results there are overall lower that later picks, in the aggregate.

Teams have whiffed on all of those pick positions.

Glad you said something here. I think people don't realize there is failed number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 picks etc., sure it's a bit easier to pick those than the 9th, 10th, 11th etc., but some years, even the number 2 pick isn't a lock. Has everyone already forgotten Scoot? It's still early, but he hasn't exactly panned out and he was the number 2 pick.

 

[2centsworth]

#2 overall is a hell pit. The results there are overall lower that later picks, in the aggregate.

Teams have whiffed on all of those pick positions.

Not picking Dylan Harper is Nico Harrison-esque, but anything is possible nowadays. You're not saying the Spurs did anything special by selecting Dylan, are you?

 

[couchman]

It was apparently easy to make a good pick this year.
1-4 and also 13 look like future all stars
5-7 and many others look like good contributors

 

[Raven_]

In the meantime Sissoko has become a player

 

[spursparker9]

In the meantime Sissoko has become a player

Happy for him to be able to play NBA rotation mins rather than stuck in G league.

 

[Exstatic]

Not picking Dylan Harper is Nico Harrison-esque, but anything is possible nowadays. You're not saying the Spurs did anything special by selecting Dylan, are you?

No, what I am saying is that teams have whiffed on 1,2, and 4.

 

[Shmurs]

First, not being a 1RP and not being a draft pick at all are two different things.
Second, Sochan ranked by stats in his draft class, which I am fully aware you just randomly dismiss because apparently it is not as accurate as your eye test:
1) 12th in minutes played
2) 12th in pts scored
3) 6th in rebounds
4) 6th in assists
5) 15th in FG%
6) 39th in 3PG%
7) 33th in FT%
8) 11th in PPG
9) 8th in RPG
10) 7th in APG
11) 21in WS
12) 38 in WS/48

I didn't put in BPM and VORP because those numbers go into the negatives and benefits either players who play on good teams, or players in the negatives who just played less.

A player without feel to the game can still be a player. Westbrook never had feel and won MVP. JR Smith had a long career and even won a title as a starter. Darius Miles, Corey Magette, Kuminga, Lamelo Ball, Trae Young, the list just goes on and on. You act like all the NBA players who ever played are these basketball geniuses but reality is that plenty of them were just athletes who does dumb things on the court. You can say these players under achieve, but to say that they can't contribute and shouldn't be drafted is just hard to justify.



And yet this season he sucked ass just so happened when those metrics and data analytics plummeted. Go figure.

BTW, it shouldn't be the only source of decision making, just that it is a big part.

This is just a hobby of yours right? There’s no way you analyze data professionally. Some of us do, believe it or not. Some of us have even built technology platforms used by fortune 100 companies to influence corporate strategy. Can you believe that?

You seem like a good guy but the way you approach this is fundamentally wrong. You can’t post contrived stats and just leave them there as smoking guns. Whatever you’ve found buried in the data are not conclusions. They’re pieces of potential evidence that should be used to trigger further inspection. Jeremy, for example, was putting up good iso numbers. But ok, how good are they really given the framework of a tanking team. And how does his inactivity on offense influence the amount of energy he can spend in iso situations? How do other teams play against historically bad teams like the spurs were in Jeremy’s prime? Might that all work together to add noise to that data?

You can’t just go hunting for post hoc rationalizations. If the numbers show what you claim they show, then being a GM is actually quite easy. You just go on nba.com and sort players by their DARKO or EPM or whatever other shit that may or may not be the truth about a player. But GM’s don’t do that. They rely on the anecdotal opinions of experts combined with cross checking against statistics.

Jeremy is what proves the rule, btw. A complete nothing player who was an analytics darling for a time.

 

[ambchang]

Did you just compare Sochan to Westbrook JR Smith Trae etc??

what's wrong with you??

Those players have a great feel for the game, maybe too individualists but it's another topic. All the players you named can create their own shot, read situations etc

So players who can create their own shot means they have good feel of the game? And no, these are players, especially Westbrook and Smith, known to NOT be able to read situations. But then again, that is your entire motto because these are basically what "I feel" type of things, which you can defend with more emojis.

You're not making any sense with your post, you're all over the place trying to defend the undefendable with absurd comps.

Why are they absurd? These are people known to have low BBIQ. You are now moving to "no feel for the game", which I am not entirely sure what that means. Ben Wallace had no feel for the game? He can't create his own shot. What do you even mean by this? But apparently you just like to throw out random descriptions that can't be nailed down and when one is shown to be incorrect, you pull the "This isn't what it means you stupid ass", followed by some emojis, but then never clarify what you actually mean.

You listed his draft data when precisely I was making the point of the over importance of those in the draft process and analising the potential of a prospect.

Those are not potential prospects, those are data from the last 3 years and 2 months of actual basketball play. If he shouldn't have been drafted, as @Shmurs contended, then I would imagine he'd be right at the bottom of the pile in all those metrics, or at least most of them, but he wasn't.

If you just look at the data Sochan look(ed) like a potential NBA player, he has the size, the mobility, showed grit etc but if you actually watch him play you notice plenty of information that aren't in the data bc only the naked eye can see them.

His decision-making, his body language, the time he makes to correct a mistake (after 4 years he still stops his dribble just when he shouldn't smh, you have to be limited intellectually at this point...), the fact that he can't create his own shot can't be highlighted by data as much as with your eyes as well, his clumsiness is also hard to see in the stats etc

The feel for the game isn't just the bbiq or (right) decision-making, it's the ability to improvise when you're off script, for that you need to be comfortable with the ball and Sochan isn't.

Which is what? Is this a trait just is unique to Sochan in the 80 years or the NBA? It is almost comical where the reason you can see Sochan being terrible from the start is not owned by any other player who ever succeeded, or even played in the NBA, but what is that exactly? Oh ... it's through your naked eyes. Clumsiness? It didn't really show up in TO stats, inability to make decisions? It didn't really show up in assist numbers. Body language? I am not even sure how to get into this one. Of course, you also said Tre Jones, Cidy, Blake, Vassell and Johnson were all terrible players, but I am sure their body language was acceptable to you.

Then you add the work ethic, the ambition/determination, the IQ, the mental strength (when things go wrong) ... and he sucks at those too!

This is a stretch to say. Like what are you basing these on? Sounds like some heavy conviction here. Pretty broad statement considering none of us actually ever met the guy. I am assuming, because based on your advanced knowledge of player evaluation, you are probably a lead scout for a team so if that is the I apologize.

Lastly you said "and yet this season..." smh

Why would you want to analyze Sochan's data for this season? I mean seriously... why would you think those data would teach you anything constructive with such limited playing time and diff roles or positions etc

IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE

But it didn't matter, because apparently 3 years or data isn't big enough for you. Besides, the point is that he is sucking this year, and guess what? His data sucked too? But then you said data is a small part. I can accept it being a lagging indicator, which is fine, but for you to say that this year isn't a aberration because he has always sucked this bad is not true, and the numbers showed it. He didn't improve on his shooting, and yet got worst in rbd%, AST%, BLK%, and TS%. The numbers are there.

You can say you've never liked his brand of basketball, which is totally subjective like how you look at players. But to say that he has always been this bad is just objectively untrue.

Stop living and dying with the data, it's only a tiny part of the picture and will never teach you anything your eyes can't see.

Stop isolating them or using small samples

I already tried to explain you many times that you don't understand how to read stats and how to use them. You misinterpret them all the time bc you still don't realize that you can LITERALLY make them say anything you want, you just have to select the ones that fit your bias.

It's a dangerous tool, it looks simple to interpret but it's a lot more complicated than it looks and can lead you to huge mistakes, statisticians will tell you that better than me.

And your solution is to not look at stats at all, despite a multi-billion dollar industry investing heavily in stats-based tools to improve team play. And I ask yet again, what stats would support your views?

Sochan is the same guy today that he was +3years ago, PATFO just messed up and took years to either admit it or realize it. Either an ego or competency issue basically.

I would say that is true, because, alas, his stats are oddly similar this year than to his rookie year! OMG! Stats. He had an improvement last year, and regressed heavily this year. Guess what told us that? Stats.

 

[ambchang]

This is just a hobby of yours right? There’s no way you analyze data professionally. Some of us do, believe it or not. Some of us have even built technology platforms used by fortune 100 companies to influence corporate strategy. Can you believe that?

You seem like a good guy but the way you approach this is fundamentally wrong. You can’t post contrived stats and just leave them there as smoking guns. Whatever you’ve found buried in the data are not conclusions. They’re pieces of potential evidence that should be used to trigger further inspection. Jeremy, for example, was putting up good iso numbers. But ok, how good are they really given the framework of a tanking team. And how does his inactivity on offense influence the amount of energy he can spend in iso situations? How do other teams play against historically bad teams like the spurs were in Jeremy’s prime? Might that all work together to add noise to that data?

You can’t just go hunting for post hoc rationalizations. If the numbers show what you claim they show, then being a GM is actually quite easy. You just go on nba.com and sort players by their DARKO or EPM or whatever other shit that may or may not be the truth about a player. But GM’s don’t do that. They rely on the anecdotal opinions of experts combined with cross checking against statistics.

Jeremy is what proves the rule, btw. A complete nothing player who was an analytics darling for a time.

So ... another lecture about my use of stats being wrong, but no examples of the right way to use stats. So how would you use stats in this case?

The premise is simple, you said Sochan shouldn't have been drafted at all. There are 60 players drafted every year, Sochan has produced in the top 15 in most of the traditional stats. Who are the other 45 players who should be drafted ahead of him? You want to use DARKo or EPM, be my guest. Please list 45 players from that draft year who were better. Better yet, find 45 players drafted that year who the experts agree are better than Sochan.

I mean, there is scouting departments for a reason, and I agree that is the more important aspect of choosing prospects, and that stats should be used as supplemental data to drive drafting decisions (along with interviews and background checks and a whole list of other things that I am ignorant on), but we are not talking about checking for potential here. You are specifically talking about in retrospect, which stats is a great tool to use.

If you want to talk expert opinion, Sochan was widely considered to be a late lottery to late teens draft pick back then.

 

[PanameSpur]

So players who can create their own shot means they have good feel of the game? And no, these are players, especially Westbrook and Smith, known to NOT be able to read situations. But then again, that is your entire motto because these are basically what "I feel" type of things, which you can defend with more emojis.



Why are they absurd? These are people known to have low BBIQ. You are now moving to "no feel for the game", which I am not entirely sure what that means. Ben Wallace had no feel for the game? He can't create his own shot. What do you even mean by this? But apparently you just like to throw out random descriptions that can't be nailed down and when one is shown to be incorrect, you pull the "This isn't what it means you stupid ass", followed by some emojis, but then never clarify what you actually mean.



Those are not potential prospects, those are data from the last 3 years and 2 months of actual basketball play. If he shouldn't have been drafted, as @Shmurs contended, then I would imagine he'd be right at the bottom of the pile in all those metrics, or at least most of them, but he wasn't.


Which is what? Is this a trait just is unique to Sochan in the 80 years or the NBA? It is almost comical where the reason you can see Sochan being terrible from the start is not owned by any other player who ever succeeded, or even played in the NBA, but what is that exactly? Oh ... it's through your naked eyes. Clumsiness? It didn't really show up in TO stats, inability to make decisions? It didn't really show up in assist numbers. Body language? I am not even sure how to get into this one. Of course, you also said Tre Jones, Cidy, Blake, Vassell and Johnson were all terrible players, but I am sure their body language was acceptable to you.


This is a stretch to say. Like what are you basing these on? Sounds like some heavy conviction here. Pretty broad statement considering none of us actually ever met the guy. I am assuming, because based on your advanced knowledge of player evaluation, you are probably a lead scout for a team so if that is the I apologize.


But it didn't matter, because apparently 3 years or data isn't big enough for you. Besides, the point is that he is sucking this year, and guess what? His data sucked too? But then you said data is a small part. I can accept it being a lagging indicator, which is fine, but for you to say that this year isn't a aberration because he has always sucked this bad is not true, and the numbers showed it. He didn't improve on his shooting, and yet got worst in rbd%, AST%, BLK%, and TS%. The numbers are there.

You can say you've never liked his brand of basketball, which is totally subjective like how you look at players. But to say that he has always been this bad is just objectively untrue.



And your solution is to not look at stats at all, despite a multi-billion dollar industry investing heavily in stats-based tools to improve team play. And I ask yet again, what stats would support your views?



I would say that is true, because, alas, his stats are oddly similar this year than to his rookie year! OMG! Stats. He had an improvement last year, and regressed heavily this year. Guess what told us that? Stats.

I'm not going back and forth with u again, not happening ^^

I already repeated myself in the previous post, you're not making any sense and refuse to acknowledge you've been wrong all this time = you can't get better is u don't learn from your mistakes.

I insist tho, stop using stats as arguments as long as you don't learn how to read them.

Take care

 

[2centsworth]

No, what I am saying is that teams have whiffed on 1,2, and 4.

That has nothing to do with us, except for our #4, though I would argue Castle was the no-brainer choice there too. Tons of teams have bombed on their #1 picks, Risacher being the most current example. However, that has nothing to do with us and our #1 picks of Wemby, Duncan, or DRob. Our front office gets zero credit for making those picks, just like not missing on Dylan Harper, who was 1b on 99.9% of draft boards. Btw, I don't mind being a fan of the luckiest team, the most blessed team, or the chosen team, whatever fits your persuasion.

I used ChatGPT to calculate the odds we would get the #1, #4, and #2 picks, and it came up with 138 to 1. Go fully shuffle a deck of cards and pick a random card. If it's an Ace, then pick another random card. If it's a Queen, you're 1 out of 138 lucky. Btw, you get one chance.

 

[Exstatic]

That has nothing to do with us, except for our #4, though I would argue Castle was the no-brainer choice there too. Tons of teams have bombed on their #1 picks, Risacher being the most current example. However, that has nothing to do with us and our #1 picks of Wemby, Duncan, or DRob. Our front office gets zero credit for making those picks, just like not missing on Dylan Harper, who was 1b on 99.9% of draft boards. Btw, I don't mind being a fan of the luckiest team, the most blessed team, or the chosen team, whatever fits your persuasion.

The post I was responding to, before you barged, uninformed and uninvited into the discussion stated:

“Would have been difficult for anyone to mess up picking #1, #2 & #4?”

I responded that teams HAVE fucked up those draft positions. I would also argue that the teams picking 1-3 in 2024 all fucked up. Teams talk themselves out of better players all the time to go with a consensus mock rating. Spurs don’t do that.

 

[Shmurs]

So ... another lecture about my use of stats being wrong, but no examples of the right way to use stats. So how would you use stats in this case?

The premise is simple, you said Sochan shouldn't have been drafted at all. There are 60 players drafted every year, Sochan has produced in the top 15 in most of the traditional stats. Who are the other 45 players who should be drafted ahead of him? You want to use DARKo or EPM, be my guest. Please list 45 players from that draft year who were better. Better yet, find 45 players drafted that year who the experts agree are better than Sochan.

I mean, there is scouting departments for a reason, and I agree that is the more important aspect of choosing prospects, and that stats should be used as supplemental data to drive drafting decisions (along with interviews and background checks and a whole list of other things that I am ignorant on), but we are not talking about checking for potential here. You are specifically talking about in retrospect, which stats is a great tool to use.

If you want to talk expert opinion, Sochan was widely considered to be a late lottery to late teens draft pick back then.

I just told you how to use those stats. I can’t really do much more for you

 

[2centsworth]

The post I was responding to, before you barged, uninformed and uninvited into the discussion stated:

“Would have been difficult for anyone to mess up picking #1, #2 & #4?”

I responded that teams HAVE fucked up those draft positions. I would also argue that the teams picking 1-3 in 2024 all fucked up. Teams talk themselves out of better players all the time to go with a consensus mock rating. Spurs don’t do that.

You mean you were responding to me? You're making absolutely no sense.

 

[Sugus]

Jeremy was a consensus lottery pick (evidence: https://www.rookiescale.com/2022-consensus-board/). That he hasn't turned out is slightly below the normal range for a #9 overall pick, but not a complete outlier at all

View attachment 179
Folks can get upset about the 2021 and 2022 drafts, but in reality all of those picks have more or less generally performed in the normal range outcomes for picks at those draft slots (12, 9, 20, 25). We had such an extensive history of picking guys at the end of the first (especially at picks 28 and 29) who were extreme outliers, that maybe folks have forgotten that the typical outcome for most picks outside of the Top 10 is somewhere between Rotation Player and Bust.

In 2021 and 2022 we just got slapped in the face by a dose of normal variance.

Data really can be beautiful, thank you Scott!

Now, where was that guy who insisted that Sochan should have never been drafted to the NBA? He's not gonna like this post

 

[KobesAchilles]

Tbh my main gripes were drafting Primo over Sengun and not drafting Buz

 

[John B]

And this suddenly feels like Spurstalk without the buffering

 

[Shmurs]

Data really can be beautiful, thank you Scott!

Now, where was that guy who insisted that Sochan should have never been drafted to the NBA? He's not gonna like this post

I am somehow surviving.

The projections and scouting reports were one thing. They said he had big potential and all that. But reality was another thing.

My argument isn’t that a front office would have been foolish to take him at the 20th pick or whatever. My argument is that he isn’t someone who had potential but lost his way or was set up to fail. INSTEAD, he was someone with no potential whatsoever, as evidenced by his time on this team.

He was not one of the top 60 prospects if you look at the reality of his abilities. But the draft is an imperfect process so he was justifiably brought into the league.

So I think the only real point of contention is whether or not you think he’s a real rotational player on any team in the league. To me it is very clear that he is not and should be overseas.

 

[PanameSpur]

Data really can be beautiful, thank you Scott!

Now, where was that guy who insisted that Sochan should have never been drafted to the NBA? He's not gonna like this post

You're still missing the point, go read my post again...

All it shows is that those "data" were either misinterpreted or overrated. They're only part of the picture and the rest of it clearly wasn't taken enough into account regarding Sochan.

He was the same and maybe worse in college in terms of work ethic, bbiq, poise etc but it was either ignored or diminished because "look at the data!!!" LMAO

There's a reason a redraft of that year doesn't put him close to the first 30 picks

 

[ambchang]

I'm not going back and forth with u again, not happening ^^

I already repeated myself in the previous post, you're not making any sense and refuse to acknowledge you've been wrong all this time = you can't get better is u don't learn from your mistakes.

I insist tho, stop using stats as arguments as long as you don't learn how to read them.

Take care

You repeated many times not to use stats, which makes absolutely no sense as any competent organization relies heavily on stats. I have no issues saying I am using stats incorrectly but am still waiting on how it was used correctly and how to use them correctly.

It’s funny how you said stats are useless to evaluate a player and yet sochan is revealed to suck this year when it just so happens the stats also reflected it. I can’t even make this stuff up.

 

[ambchang]

I just told you how to use those stats. I can’t really do much more for you

My bad. Glanced over it and missed that. However, I’m still waiting for a list of 60 players you’d draft over sochan that year based on what has already happened and what is projected to happen.

 

[PanameSpur]

You repeated many times not to use stats, which makes absolutely no sense as any competent organization relies heavily on stats. I have no issues saying I am using stats incorrectly but am still waiting on how it was used correctly and how to use them correctly.

It’s funny how you said stats are useless to evaluate a player and yet sochan is revealed to suck this year when it just so happens the stats also reflected it. I can’t even make this stuff up.

Either you consciously put words in my mouth I never said or you have real comprehension and reading issues to fix.

Never said stats are useless...

Try again.