Because neither is known for their D. Durant scores more because he takes more FTs and shoots 3s, but the difference between their O and D is similar.

That it’s something worth keeping in mind over the next few seasons. Durant is so young that we have yet to see what the story of his career will be, but I’m certain that all the advanced statheads will be watching him because of his atrocious +/-. They’re intensely interested because he’ll be the prototype against which other guys with similar stats will be compared—and valued (or devalued).

The other thing that I will say is that while +/- is an inherently flawed stat (if you’re on a bad team, well there goes your +/-, and if you’re on a good team or play with CP3 your +/- will be overly inflated), such a dramatic discrepancy between Durant’s +/- and the rest of the team is very interesting. I don’t think anyone has quite figured out a good way to talk about it or analyze it, but I personally do believe that there is something substantial (in terms of W’s and L’s) when you compare Durant and Battier as case-studies of player impact. They represent the polar extremes of the spectrum—great stats but bad team, or poor stats but great team.

Where can you draw the distinctions between each player’s influence on his team? I don’t know, and I know that’s a thorny issue if you want to try to objectively talk about it. But I think, and this is where we still need to give Durant a few more years to cement or augment his career trend, that we can’t discount the notion that Durant may be, at base, a detriment to winning despite everything else he can do. Conversely, despite his seemingly sparse contributions, Battier is a net producer of wins. My prediction is that Durant’s career will tell the statheads a lot about what makes a player a net winner versus a net loser, as he has all the tools and abilities to be a superstar, yet his team is worse than the TWolves despite greater talent.

I’m guessing even the most devoted stat-heads on this site don’t take this at 100%. I take a similar stance to both Henry Abbott and Bethlehem Shoals: that both scouting and statistical measures should be used in tandem in looking at a player’s abilities and contributions. It takes both to get the best perspective.

Talent-wise he’s a budding superstar; advanced stat-wise it shows he’s got a lot to improve upon to improve his team’s performance and subsequently his +/- performance. Namely defense, improved shot selection, and passing. He’s young, ultra-talented, driven, and on a still-growing team, so he’s more than likely going to improve his +/- as his career goes along.

Here’s a great article by Shoals and Tom Ziller that discusses this area quite well: http://www.gelfmagazine.com/archives/love_and_basketball.php

practically as I write this.

Summed up: His defensive numbers last season bear an eery resemblance to Tim Thomas’s body of work. But Durant is very young and very thin, and has the potential to improve (a little intensity might help).

And nja700—at first glance I was sure you were linking to a post from GILF magazine.

The gentlemen and ladies at GILF magazine actually run a classy operation. Very tasteful.

I thought Henry Abbott did a great job on his initial post and especially the follow-up.

Durant takes too many low % shots on offense and he doesn’t defend well (particularly the pick-n-roll) on defense. Of course his +/- are terrible as a result and of course it matters.

He’ll probably improve on both ends, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he struggles to improve that much and is ultimately much less valuable than other “superstars” (read: high scorers).

Like Iverson, Durant is NOT an unstoppable scorer, he just shoots a bunch and is able to make more contested shots than most players, which makes him look impressive. But that is not an effective way to play basketball and he will continue to hurt his team until he changes the way he plays on both ends.

Durant seems like a likable person, I hope he takes this to heart and has good coaching that will help him zero in on these weaknesses.

Interesting debate. Durant has turned into essentially the second coming of Kevin Martin, albeit at the SF instead of the SG. Efficient scorers who don’t depend on teammates to set them up and who rarely pass out of a scoring situation. The offensive stats and efficiency are truly great, but their are flaws in the game.

(1) A lack of passing by Durant likely affects his teammates energy and movement when Durant has the ball. If after Durant gets the ball 90% of the time he takes a shot, whether double or even quadruple teamed as mentioned in Truehoop, what motivation do teammates have to expend energy. Yes coaching and motivation may be able to solve this issue, but it’s human nature.

(2) His lack of defense is talked about ad nauseum. Most likely he improves, but his ceiling in this department is not high. Yes he is tall, but is not overly athletic, he’s extemely skinny and has the build of a guy who is not likely to ever put on pounds, and defending the SF position he is going to have to go up against some of the best athletes in the NBA. Garnett who people compare body types to always had an athleticism and height and length advantage against all the people he guarded. KD will likely have the height, but I don’t know if he has the physical tools to develop into a stopper. The video review of his PnR defense seems to show that lack of effort and poor technique are major problems right now and definitely correctable, so he does have room to improve.

(3) Rebounding: One of the things I was most excited about Durant after his year in college was his all around game. Not only was he a proficient scorer, he average around 10 boards a game sometimes playing some PF. As noted during our constant evaluation of KLove, rebounding rate is a stat that tends to have little variance as your career progresses. Sure minutes effect your game averages and total rebounds, but your rebound rate generally is static. Kevin Durant has not been able to translate anything close to College rebounding ability to the pros. I doubt this changes.

So what is Durant’s peak? An extremely efficient isolation scorer who is likely never going to develop into a defensive stopper and who has little passing and rebounding value to a team. When thinking of people like Nash and Al, at least they offer great passing and rebounding to go along with their scoring games. Don’t get me wrong, Durant is a nice player, I just think there are some serious questions as to whether he’ll become a legitimate Franchise Player let alone a top 5 in the league or HOF type player the media is already projecting for him.

This reminds me of the advanced baseball stats vs AVG debate.

“Come on, he hit .302 and he’s only 22 years old!”

“Yeah, but he strikes out at a ton, never walks, his VORP is 15 and his range factor is below average for his position.”

“But he hit .302!”

between Durant’s 2nd season and George Gervin’s 2nd season (another skinny scorer who wasn’t exactly known for expending a lot of energy on the defensive end of the court).

I know, “ABA” and all that . But Gervin’s currently in the Hall of Fame (I’m not sayin’, I’m just sayin’)

I meant my post to be absurd, as absurd as PD’s, no commentary on you at all.

http://basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=732