Wallace vs. Noah

John Hollinger says "I don't understand why they don't just give Noah the job already. He's been far better than Wallace." Since I went on record as a proponent of the Wallace signing at the time it happened, I was vaguely hoping to find some evidence to debunk the idea that Noah's been far better, but as you'll see below the evidence is hard to find:

Given the age difference, the case for giving Noah the lion's share of the minutes seems to get even more compelling. The experience will probably help him improve whereas the extra wear-and-tear can only hurt Wallace. Meanwhile, bad signing. Noah, however, is making all us veterans of Manhattan private school basketball programs proud.

Comments

"Noah, however, is making all us veterans of Manhattan private school basketball programs proud."

You were a "veteran" of a Manhattan private school basketball program?

(*awkward pause*)

What happened?

Posted by Swopa | January 24, 2008 1:02 PM

He makes us Gators even prouder.

Posted by mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari | January 24, 2008 1:07 PM

Thanks. Another opportunity for me to cringe.

What I wouldn't give to have Aldridge instead of Thomas. But I'm sick of the conventional wisdom about how we should have held onto Chandler. It was not going to turn around for him on this team. He needed to go. He just had to.

Posted by Freddie | January 24, 2008 1:14 PM

Could someone explain what ts% and +/- mean?

Posted by Andrew | January 24, 2008 1:23 PM

A guy I knew in college wore a "Horace Mann Basketball" t-shirt to class one day - to be honest, I thought it was one of those ironic t-shirts one gets at Urban Outfitters or something.

The idea of my friends from Manhattan private schools (Horace Mann, Fieldston, Trinity, etc.) playing basketball is completely hilarious to me.

Posted by CJH | January 24, 2008 1:28 PM

I was against the drafting of Noah but he has been surprisingly effective lately

Posted by Tom | January 24, 2008 1:54 PM

Hurrah, Matt went to a ritzy private school.

Get over yourself, you wankerriffic little tool. And speaking of healthy eating (in a post above), it looks like you ought to engage in some of that, at least going by your chipmunk cheeks in the embedded bloggerheads vids.

Posted by MY Strikes Again | January 24, 2008 1:54 PM

They both suck. Should've traded for Zack Randolph. A superior post scorer, Great rebounder - especially offensive. Defensive Liability but da bulls have enough team inside defense to cover up zack's deficiencies.

I'm also a pistons fan. Thank you chicago for taking Ben Wallace, and his no-offensive game, and brooding off our hands.

Enjoy paying $15M to a 36 year old who won't be that good at defense.

Posted by nattyb | January 24, 2008 2:01 PM

1. Develop Noah. And, while you're at it, tell Adrian Griffith to shut the hell up. If he's good enough to be disciplining rookies, he's good enough to start. Oh, wait - he's not good enough to start? Then he's not good enough to be disciplining rookies.

2. Develop Aaron Gray. No, he'll never be Kareem, but he shows some promise in a Kevin McHale kind of way. He needs to toughen up, physically and mentally, but I think he can do it.

3. Find someone who can coach Tyrus Thomas. His problems seem to be attitude and a lack of discipline, not a lack of physical gifts. Somebody should be able to develop that.

4. Sorry, Jim Boylan - you just ain't cutting it. I watched a double OT game a while ago and the veterans were exhausted, but JB couldn't bring himself to dip further into the rotation. So who give you a better chance to win: an exhausted vet or a rookie who's got fresh legs and wind? At that stage of the game, I'd go with the rookies.

But hey, what do I know? I only started watching the Bulls when Stormin' Norman, Butterbean, Chet the Jet, and Jerry Sloan were playing.

Posted by Uncle Jeffy | January 24, 2008 2:16 PM

Whoa there, MY Strikes Again... Why so much bitterness? Did a chubby prep school graduate steal your wife? Did you lose a promotion at Checker Auto Mart to a Harvard graduate? Did Lithuanian nazi collaborators eat your sister?

I'm sure you have legitimate reasons to be angry (bald spot spreading?), but taking your anger out on Matthew is not going to really make you feel better. Right? Right? Admit it. You feel like a doofus now, don't you? A schmendrik. The only thing that's going to make those icky feeling go away is time in fornt of the mirror, my friend, a deep exploration of your issues and the source from whence they issue, with the final goal some sort of closure. It's hard, but not as hard as spending your days in a rage, alienating people left and right and looking like complete wad. Give it a try, you'll feel better, I promise you. Take some time off, then report back in a couple weeks and tell us how it's going. We care about you MYSA. We've all been there before. We know you can do it.

Posted by cw | January 24, 2008 2:16 PM

"I'm sick of the conventional wisdom about how we should have held onto Chandler. It was not going to turn around for him on this team. He needed to go. He just had to."

No, Scott Skiles had to go. There's no way to tell if Chandler would have developed into the player he is today if he didn't have an asshat of a coach, but it seems likely.

I'm still on the fence on whether my Warriors should have taken Noah. It's too early to tell, I know -- Wright was drafted for the player he'll be in 3 years, not the guy he is today (well, he was drafted to trade for KG, but that's beside the point). Yes, the Warriors look like they need Noah, and yes, they'd be better right now with him, but in Nellie's system, you can't have two guys on the floor who can't shoot the ball from outside of 6 feet, and the Warriors already have Biedrins. They need a 4 who can at least shoot a little.

Posted by too many steves | January 24, 2008 2:19 PM

nattyb,

sorry, but you are wrong on zach randolph.
he is a true cancer. he is also a black hole on offense. once the ball goes in to him, it never goes back out unless he is getting it again on a re-post. he is typical of a certain class of very good nba player who will always get his numbers - 20 points, 10 rebounds - while his team always loses.
i live in portland, so i saw his act up close for the last few years.
it is not a coincidence that the blazers are winning now that he has been shipped out of town.
i do agree about the bulls taking ben wallace off the pistons' hands, though, as i'm a transplanted detroiter who still roots for the pistons.
wallace is worn out. his entire career was built on superior athleticism, and just a little drop off in that athleticism, due to age, has had a dramatic effect on his ability to do the things he did so well.
if he could go to a team that could let him play power forward and just rebound, he might be a good player for a couple of years. but his days as an all-over-the-court defensive demon who gets four blocks and 3 steals and changes the entire tenor of a basketball game, those days are over.
noah is for real.
it kills me when people pooh-pooh players like noah. so what if he can't shoot, he does so many other things that help a team win. people always forget about all of the other nba players in history who've been excellent players and key parts of championship teams playing the same kind of game. dennis rodman is the player who most immediately comes to mind, though there are plenty others.

Posted by frankie d | January 24, 2008 2:19 PM

Be very careful about extrapolating 13 minutes against the second units into results for 36 minutes against the starters.

Posted by Steven Donegal | January 24, 2008 2:20 PM

Could someone explain what ts% and +/- mean?

The only stat in the table I understood was mpg, which seems to show that Wallace gets far better mileage than Noah--a key concern with the price of oil over $100 per barrel . . .

Posted by rea | January 24, 2008 2:51 PM

"TS" is "true shooting," which accounts for the fact that three pointers are worth three points and for free throws in the the shooting percentage. +/- is a statistic that counts the team's performance with a player on or off the court: + 15 while you play, or -15 while you play.

I think that's right

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | January 24, 2008 3:10 PM

+/- means the team's point differential over the opponent while that player is on the floor.

Now, the following two definitions are copied from one of the Hollinger ESPN webpages.

True Shooting Percentage = (Total points x 50) divided by [(FGA + (FTA x 0.44)]

Turnover Ratio = (Turnover x 100) divided by [(FGA + (FTA x 0.44) + Assists + Turnovers]

Posted by nbt | January 24, 2008 3:15 PM

Steven Donegal,

What makes you think Noah is playing against second units? He plays off & on throughout the game. He's a reserve player, not a scrub who only gets in when the game is over.

Posted by Gator90 | January 24, 2008 3:18 PM

Because then the French would win!

I'm just bitter because the only coverage they have on French TV of the NBA is when Noah, Turiaf, Diaw, Pietrus or Parker does something awesome.

Which means I can't even get the scores for my beloved Blazers or almost-equally loved Pistons on the idiot box.

Posted by dadanarchist | January 24, 2008 3:25 PM

Can someone tell me why turnover ratio is one of the appropriate statistics to be reviewing in this instance? I mean, Noah isn't exactly a point guard.

Posted by Al | January 24, 2008 3:35 PM

Turnovers are costly regardless of what position you are.

BTW, for those who like these more advanced statistics, check out

http://www.basketball-reference.com/

Posted by The Animal | January 24, 2008 4:07 PM

Turnovers for a big man are a good indication of whether he can handle the ball inside or is constantly fumbling it away, a la Adonal Foyle.

I'm no stathead, but it does seem to be the case that guys who play very few minutes often project out far above how good they actually are. Extreme example being, you come in for the final minute, get an assist and a bucket, suddenly you're projecting to 48 assists and 96 points per game. If a guy's only playing 13 minutes a game, a lot of that's gonna be in garbage time.

Posted by Alan in SF | January 24, 2008 4:17 PM

I told you so.

Noah a steal at 9.

You can look it up.

Posted by Armando | January 24, 2008 4:17 PM

To Alan in SF: on the contrary, the evidence that exists (and statheads have pondered this question a lot) suggests that giving more minutes to players increases their per minute production (especially with guys who play in very short stints). Guys who have been buried on the bench and start to play bigger minutes due to trades or injuries usually improve their production per minute rates, for example. Sefolosha (to keep with the Bulls theme) is a recent example of this.

Posted by Carlos | January 24, 2008 4:29 PM

Forget Wallace and Noah, get more minutes for my man Aaron Gray!

P-I-T-T!

Posted by Jeff | January 24, 2008 9:22 PM

Yeah, and also Wallace is a punk and Noah isn't.

Posted by Xanthippas | January 25, 2008 12:02 AM

"No, Scott Skiles had to go. There's no way to tell if Chandler would have developed into the player he is today if he didn't have an asshat of a coach, but it seems likely."

Yup.

-----

The problem with statistical comparisons between Wallace and Noah is that Wallace was signed to provide on-the-ball defense, which doesn't really show up in the stats for the most part.

I've got no horse in the Wallace-Noah debate, but the stats presented here are mostly irrelevant, with the exception of +/-.

Posted by Petey | January 25, 2008 12:10 AM