[外電] 太陽季後球員分析:Josh Childress

看板PHX-Suns作者sandwalk (sandwalker)時間12年前 (2012/05/18 00:37)推噓14(14推 0噓 11→)

留言25則, 16人參與討論串1/1

文章來源: http://ppt.cc/i985 In the summer of 2010, the Phoenix Suns negotiated a sign-and-trade for former Atlanta Hawks swingman Josh Childress, who was just returning to the NBA from a two-year stint overseas. Childress had earned a reputation as a quality sixth man during his years in Atlanta and many saw the acquisition of the 6-foot-8 wing as a great move. He was expected to provide slashing, rebounding and some lock-down defense on opposing guards and small forwards. ‘10年夏天, 太陽簽下的前老鷹隊的搖擺人童裝, 當時他剛結束為期兩年的海外受限合約. 童裝在老鷹期間以打好第六人的角色而出名, 簽下這名6尺8寸的前鋒也被視為是很好的交易. 他預計能提供些許得分, 籃板和一些鎖定敵方後衛和小前鋒的防禦能力. Unfortunately, that isn't exactly how it turned out. Two years into the five-year $33.50 million contract, Childress has only played in 88 of a possible 154 games, averaging just 15.7 minutes per game. Chills has spent more time sitting on the bench (perhaps playing checkers?) than he has on the court. So what happened? 不幸的是, 後來的結果卻不如預期. 33.5M鎂五年合約的頭兩年, 童裝只打了154比賽中的88場, 平均每場只有15.7分鐘. 童裝在板凳上的時間遠比上場還多. 到底怎麼了? Childress and his fit on this team has been discussed to death on this blog. At this point, we all know that his inability to knock down the 3-ball, or even the mid-range two, means he has no place playing alongside Nash. The pick-and-roll needs shooters to space the floor for Steve and the big to work in the paint, and even Grant Hill with his reliable,17-footer was pushing it. So Chilly in the starting five was not something we were ever going to see without multiple injuries. But why could he never crack the rotation as a bench player? Let's dive into the numbers to find out. 關於童裝能否融入太陽的問題已經沒人要討論了. 我們現在知道,童裝投不進3分, 中距離也不行, 意味著他沒法和老大一起上場. 要執行檔拆必需有外圍的射手群們幫老大和負責攻擊的長人在籃下清出空間, 即使沒有遠距離射程, Hill可靠的17呎中距離也足夠在這點上幫上忙. 因此,所以如果不是有人受傷,童裝根本不會被排進五人先發. 但他為甚麼連替補輪值都排不進? 讓我們深入他的數據來找出問題. Career Per Game Stats ( 生涯平均數據 ) Season Age Tm Lg G GS MP FG FGA 04-05 21 ATL NBA 80 44 29.7 3.8 8 05-06 22 ATL NBA 74 10 30.4 3.8 6.8 06-07 23 ATL NBA 55 13 36.8 4.7 9.4 07-08 24 ATL NBA 76 0 29.9 4.3 7.5 10-11 27 PHO NBA 54 3 16.6 2.2 4 11-12 28 PHO NBA 34 0 14.4 1.4 2.9 Career NBA 373 70 27.6 3.6 6.8 Season FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB 04-05 0.47 0.2 0.7 0.232 2.4 2.9 0.823 2.4 05-06 0.552 0.4 0.9 0.492 2.1 2.7 0.766 1.8 06-07 0.504 0.5 1.4 0.338 3 3.8 0.795 2.2 07-08 0.571 0.3 0.8 0.367 2.9 3.6 0.807 2.3 10-11 0.565 0 0.3 0.063 0.5 1.1 0.492 1.3 11-12 0.485 0.1 0.7 0.167 0 0.1 0 0.9 Career 0.524 0.3 0.8 0.329 2 2.6 0.779 1.9 Season DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS 04-05 3.6 6 1.9 0.9 0.4 1.3 2.3 10.1 05-06 3.4 5.2 1.8 1.2 0.5 1.4 2.5 10 06-07 3.9 6.2 2.3 1.1 0.7 1.5 2.1 13 07-08 2.6 4.9 1.5 0.9 0.6 1.3 1.7 11.8 10-11 1.6 2.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.3 5 11-12 1.9 2.8 1 0.4 0.2 0.3 1.1 2.9 Career 3 4.9 1.6 0.9 0.5 1.2 1.9 9.5 Per-36 Minutes ( 換算36分鐘上場時間統計資料 ) Season Age Tm Lg G GS MP FG FGA 04-05 21 ATL NBA 80 44 2376 4.6 9.7 05-06 22 ATL NBA 74 10 2249 4.4 8.1 06-07 23 ATL NBA 55 13 2024 4.6 9.2 07-08 24 ATL NBA 76 0 2274 5.2 9.1 10-11 27 PHO NBA 54 3 894 4.9 8.6 11-12 28 PHO NBA 34 0 491 3.5 7.3 Career NBA 373 70 10308 4.7 8.9 Season FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB 04-05 0.47 0.2 0.8 0.232 2.9 3.5 0.823 3 05-06 0.552 0.5 1 0.492 2.5 3.2 0.766 2.1 06-07 0.504 0.5 1.4 0.338 3 3.7 0.795 2.2 07-08 0.571 0.3 0.9 0.367 3.5 4.4 0.807 2.8 10-11 0.565 0 0.6 0.063 1.2 2.4 0.492 2.8 11-12 0.485 0.3 1.8 0.167 0 0.1 0 2.3 Career 0.524 0.3 1 0.329 2.7 3.4 0.779 2.5 Season DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS 04-05 4.3 7.3 2.3 1.1 0.5 1.6 2.8 12.2 05-06 4 6.2 2.1 1.4 0.6 1.6 2.9 11.9 06-07 3.9 6 2.3 1 0.6 1.4 2.1 12.7 07-08 3.2 5.9 1.9 1.1 0.7 1.6 2 14.2 10-11 3.5 6.2 1.7 1.3 0.9 1.8 2.7 11 11-12 4.7 7 2.5 1 0.4 0.7 2.8 7.3 Career 3.9 6.4 2.1 1.2 0.6 1.5 2.5 12.3 Advanced ( 各項進階指數 ) Season Age Tm Lg G MP PER TS% eFG% 04-05 21 ATL NBA 80 2376 15.2 0.543 0.481 05-06 22 ATL NBA 74 2249 15.8 0.626 0.583 06-07 23 ATL NBA 55 2024 16.2 0.586 0.529 07-08 24 ATL NBA 76 2274 17.8 0.647 0.59 10-11 27 PHO NBA 54 894 13 0.567 0.568 11-12 28 PHO NBA 34 491 11.1 0.501 0.505 Career NBA 373 10308 15.7 0.593 0.544 Season ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% 04-05 9.1 14.8 11.8 10.4 1.6 1.1 12.5 16 05-06 7 13.9 10.3 9.4 2 1.3 14.6 14 06-07 7.2 13.1 10.1 10.8 1.5 1.4 11.6 15.7 07-08 9 10.2 9.6 8.5 1.6 1.4 12.4 15.8 10-11 8.9 11.1 10 7 1.9 1.9 15.5 14.3 11-12 7.2 14.6 10.9 10 1.5 0.9 8.3 10.1 Career 8.1 12.9 10.5 9.5 1.7 1.3 12.8 15 Season ORtg DRtg OWS DWS WS WS/48 04-05 113 111 3.7 0.9 4.6 0.093 05-06 121 111 4.6 1.1 5.7 0.121 06-07 119 109 4.1 1.4 5.5 0.13 07-08 127 110 6 1.5 7.6 0.16 10-11 109 110 0.8 0.6 1.4 0.076 11-12 114 107 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.092 Career 119 110 19.7 5.9 25.7 0.119 Data courtesy Basketball-Reference.com. Looking at his Atlanta numbers, the first thing that jumps out to me is his defensive rating. We were expecting a defensive dynamo when we signed Childress, but even his numbers in Atlanta show that that simply isn't the case. Add in the fact that he spent two years in Greece playing a completely different style of basketball and defending different kinds of players, and it's no wonder he's been a disappointment on that end. So that's strike one. 一看童裝在老鷹時間的數據, 我馬上先注意他的防守. 當初我們簽下童裝時, 期待的是防守能量, 但即使是在老鷹時間的數據, 也顯示並非如此. 再加上他在希臘待了兩年, 打得是完全不同風格的比賽, 防守的是不同類型的球員, 這也難怪他最終令人失望. 此為原因一. The second thing that I noticed were his offensive numbers. Chill has never been a go-to guy offensively, but his Atlanta stats show that he used to be a viable threat to score. He was a double-digit scorer in each of his four years with the Hawks, and his shooting percentages and offensive rating are pretty darn good. So why didn't we see that Chilldress? I have two possible reasons. 第二件事, 我注意到的是他的進攻數據. 童裝從來不是進攻上的關鍵人物, 但他在老鷹時期的數據顯示他曾是一個可用的得分點. 他在老鷹的四年都是平均達兩位數的得分手 , 他的投籃命中率和進攻的評價都相當不錯. 那麼, 為什麼我們沒有看到這樣的童裝? 我有兩個可能的原因. First, and this one most of you know already, he was not put in a position to maximize his strengths. MySynergySports.com says that 29.6% of Childress' offensive possessions (at least those ending in a FGA, a TO, or FTA) came in spot-up situations, by far the most of any play type. That doesn't seem wise for a player without a reliable jumpshot. Second and third on the list are what were perceived to be Chilly's strengths, cuts to the basket and plays in transition, and he was pretty effective in these situations. However, those two categories accounted for roughly 34 percent of his plays, or a total of 37 out of 108. So why didn't we see more of him in these situations? I'm not really sure. 首先,大家都已知道, 他沒有固定的位置以儘量發揮自己的優勢. MySynergySports.com 顯示童裝的每輪進攻 (以出手/失誤/罰球結束的每回合攻勢) 的29.6%都是以定點投籃作結束,遠多於大部分類型的球員. 對一個沒有可靠跳投能力的球員而言, 這麼做似乎並不聰明. 依序排下來的第二和第三的則被認為是童裝的優點, 分別是切入和轉換快攻,他在這些情況中就相當有效率. 然而,這兩類只佔大約34%, 或是108次攻擊中的37次. 那麼 ,為什麼我們沒看到他更多這樣的攻勢? 我真的不確定. he doesn't exist any more, at least for the time being. When I watch him play, I just don't see the same guy that was so effective off the bench for the Hawks. He seems to have lost confidence. He was not aggressive at all offensively on the rare occasions that he got on the court. He just seemed lost out there for the most part. 其次, 我對為什麼童裝打不出以前表現的唯一解釋是, 他的身手已經-至少是暫時性地- 不再存在. 當我看著他打球, 就是看不到以前那個有效率的老鷹替補. 他似乎已經失去了信心. 他在稀有的上場時間裡也完全沒有進攻侵略性. 他似乎就是已經失去了大部分身手. But there have been flashes of the old Chills. Every now and then, he showcased a little bit of the athleticism and craftiness that made him effective in Atlanta. He certainly plays with energy, as evidenced by his 7.2 offensive rebound percentage, good for third on the team behind the two centers. His ORtg and DRtg were both decent this year at 114 and 107, and he was sixth on the team with 0.92 win shares per 48 minutes (beware small sample size). 但童裝還是有回魂的時候. 偶爾, 他會展示出一點讓他在老鷹時期具有效率的運動天賦和技巧. 他肯定還是帶著能量在打球,可以從他7.2的進攻籃板百分比看出來, 這只排在隊中的兩個中鋒之後. 他的進攻指數和防守指數今年還不錯, 分別是114和107, 他的每 48分鐘贏球貢獻值在對上排第六.(當然, 這裡的樣本數很小) Childress also deserves credit for accepting his role. He has racked up plenty of DNP-CDs in his two years in Phoenix, yet we haven't heard any complaints from him. He's also kept himself ready just in case the team needed him, and he responded as well as can be expected when his name was finally called upon. 童裝值得一提還有他願意接受他的角色. 他在太陽已經有兩年幾乎都因無法上場而備受折磨, 但我們還沒有聽到他有任何抱怨. 他還是持續做好準備, 以防萬一球隊需要他; 當他終於被叫上場時, 他的表現也符合預計. However, as much as I like Childress, if he can't find a way to get on the court it means he can't produce. With as much as he is being paid, we can't afford him not to produce. Josh has 3 years remaining on his contract, and he is set to make $6.5 million next season with his salary escalating over the following years. The Suns still have the ability to use the amnesty clause, and with the way things have turned out, Childress is a prime candidate to use it on. 但是, 就算我喜歡童裝, 如果他不能找到方法獲得上場機會, 亦即意味著沒有貢獻. 以他的薪水, 如果他不能對太陽有所貢獻, 我們就無法負擔他. 童裝還有3年合約,下季薪水預計是6.5M鎂, 接下來幾季還會增加. 下季太陽仍能使用特赦條款, 按現在的情況, 童裝將會是被太陽釋出的首要目標. So what do you all think? Is there still hope for Chilly in a Suns uniform? Or is this ill-fated union about to come to an end? 所以, 你怎麼想? 童裝是否仍有希望留在太陽? 或者他和太陽這個命運多舛的組合即將結束? -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 119.127.81.233

推

articlebear

05/18 00:47, , 1^F

05/18 00:47, 1^F

推

maydayholic

05/18 00:54, , 2^F

05/18 00:54, 2^F

推

augopf50123

05/18 01:09, , 3^F

05/18 01:09, 3^F