Math News — NBA All-Star picks

Instead of getting back to David Hawkins’ emotional spectrum, which I might touch on moreso in a few days, I thought I’d do my NBA All-Star picks. I didn’t get the starting lineups exactly right, but I’m not changing them, because why would I? The original part about these picks is that they’re my picks, so no sense changing them around just to accomodate reality.

Although, I will stress that I made them before the actual picks were released, and in so doing I very much did attempt to accomodate reality as much as possible. In fact, more often than in years past, I think I made the picks that I actually thought would be correct, rather than insisting on picking who I thought deserved to go to the All-Star game despite the likelihood that said candidate wouldn’t get picked.

Does that make sense? Like, in previous instances, there are in my head two lists: the list of players who likely will make it, and the list of those who should make it, and in my mind these had somehow become two different lists. Ridiculous, right? This year, it’s more — I’m picking who I think “they” will pick, and … yeah, I forget exactly what combination of players, media, and fans pick the starters and reserves. But I think I have a good sense of who “they” are likely to choose because I remember who they chose last year, and I have a sense of teams as they have been chosen in years past.

Anyway — here are the All-Star teams as I would pick them:

So the only “ranking” is that the five starters are listed on top, and then the seven reserves below. Bunch of notes here but generally speaking I will say this. My sense of who deserves to go is based mostly on stats, but also somewhat on commentary. My source for stats is basketball-reference.com, and my insane, OCD habit is to each day check the stats in the NBA by checking the top quartile of performances on the above web site’s list of players by Game Score. Every day that site lists the “top performers,” but the list includes bottom performers as well — they show a list of pretty much everybody who got any minutes at all the previous day — but the list is ranked, so I look at the top one-quarter of that list. And doing so, I see certain names repeatedly. Doing so, I know who is putting up great games.

Now Game Score’s not a perfect stat. Actually — the hell if I know — it might be perfect. But I don’t know the algorithm for it. Find it and email me about it; I’ll fall in love with you if you do. It reminds me, ultimately, of the NFL’s quarterback rating. It’s a complex stat that puts out some number that is meaningless, except that it tends to value the things that we value in a good player. Points, made shots, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks — these things are assigned positive value. Missed shots, turnovers, these things are assigned negative value. So ultimately, it just provides a pretty good number by which to rank performances. Not that important how they’re tanked at the end of the day. But it does decide which performances I look at.

Still, looking at the top .25 of players is quite a good amount. Like for example, on Thursday night there were only three games played, featuring six teams — that’s 69 players. The top quarter of that list would then be 17.25 players, so I looked at 18 players. That means I looked at about the top three players on each team. And I read across the stat sheet for each player, so I see field goals, three-pointers, rebounds, assists, turnovers, a lot of stuff.

So that’s basically what I know about what’s going on. I don’t watch highlights, nor do I watch live action. I still know what’s going on.

Okay, so here are a few individual notes about my picks:

• I left Anthony Davis out as a sort of a short-cut. I realize he’ll be selected, but then his injury will keep him from playing, and so somebody will take his spot. I didn’t designate any one player an injury replacement, although the last guy in on my roster was probably Zion. When I picked Zion I was thinking maybe I was higher on him than a lot of other people were, but then I saw like a dozen articles about him in the past week, so I guess I’m not the only one who’s noticing how good he is. It is kind of hard to notice because his team sucks so bad. Speaking of which …
• I mentioned above my method for reading data. So I have genreal impressions based on that data. But to actually come up with these teams, I had another method. That method was to list the teams in each division according to their current place in the standings. That’s another thing I usually check each day. But anyway, it’s very easy to find standings. Having done this, I tried to generate candidates from each team. But my bias was toward the top teams. On my actual list you see numbers in parentheses — that’s the place that player’s team occupied in the standings on the day I made the list. You’ll see that very few players on lousy teams are on my lists. (Lousy teams would be tenth place or higher in the standings.) This ultimately proved for me to be a great tiebreaker, since there are a lot of players having great statistical seasons this year. But if they’re doing it for a lousy team, well, it’s not as impressive, it just isn’t. It never has been. The best teams ought to have their stars in the All-Star game. The worst teams? Meh. Maybe if they’re really good.
• I also believe that the biggest stars deserve to play, even if they’re having an off-year or whatever. Guys who have made a name for themselves are going to get voted in, sometimes at the expense of other players who might have better cases in one way or another. For example Kyrie Irving; at first when I made my picks he was injured and I imagined him not being there, but as soon as he got off the injured list, it was a no-brainer he’d be in the game. He’s just a huge star, and I know from articles I’ve read that the players respect for him endures even as the media tears at him. (I didn’t think he would start, but whatever!)
• Oh yeah, so my two errors in picking the starting lineups — well, the error with Kyrie was small; I mean I was correct in picking one of the Nets to start in the back court along with KD in the front court. I just got the wrong one. I would argue that really it was the fans/media/whoever who chose the wrong one — see this Jonathan Tjarks article for something about how awesome Harden has been since the trade. And in the West, I picked Dame Lillard over Luka Doncic, because I’m not a jackass. No, Luka’s not a bad pick in the sense that his numbers are good. But his team is fairly lousy, at least five games in the standings behind Lillard’s, and Lillard’s numbers are better as well. So I got those two thing wrong about the starting lineup, and that’s why.

• There’s my snubs! Again, they’re in no particular order. It’s being talked about quite a bit how the East is especially full of deserving players this year. For a while I really wanted to put Gordon Hayward in there. I figured Domantas Sabonis was probably a shoe-in — and he may be — for the above-.500 Pacers, but then they went on a mini-losing streak and, well, there are so many guys having good years! I wanted to put Nikola Vukevic in there; he’s having a career best season, and he’s always been pretty good. Colin Sexton was making some noise earlier this season. Fred Van Vleet had that 54-point game for the Raptors. And I know all about the Zach Lavine buzz, and he does deserve it; he’s a damn good player. I mean hell, I guess I deleted him from my little list there, but Jerami Grant has all-star numbers, but his team totally sucks which as I mentioned earlier, can be a real problem. In my mind Lavine and Sexton were as good as Trae Young and deserved consideration. Similarly, Hayward, and to a lesser extent Sabonis and Vukevic — were guys who were as good as the Knicks’ Julius Randle, and I was in a bind over which I would consider.
• So what happened? Well first of all, I went back to the standings, and I noted that Philadelphia has been dominating the east, and I had picked only one 76er. Meanwhile Ben Simmons, who had started out the season struggling a bit, had come on strong with some really good games. So he leap frogged that whole cluster of dudes. The Sixers need to have two players in. Tobias Harris has been good, but Simmons has been better. Done.
  Next: the Heat’s Jimmy Butler came back from injury, and his team started winning games. Now, this is a controversial pick and it violates the rule I was bragging about … in a way my two rules come into conflict, that being first, pick what will happen, not what shoulbd happen, versus second, pick big stars whenever possible. Jimmy Butler is a big fucking star, especially after his perforance in the NBA Finals in the Bubble. He is a stud. You don’t want to have an All-Star game without him, you just don’t. Failing to pick him would just be stupid. However — based on a lot of other people’s picks, I have a queasy feeling that they’re getting ready to pick Butler’s teammate Bam Adebayo instead of Jimmy. And Bam’s numbers are good. But with Butler out, the Heat were freaking roadkill. Bam was playing, putting up good numbers, and his team was getting scorched. He’s not a big enough star to deserve to go despite those lousy win totals. Although he does have a cool name. We’ll see what happens.
  Okay so now, adding those two guys to the other players I felt were stars from the division’s best teams — the three guys from Brooklyn, two from Philly, two from Milwaukee, two from Boston (hold that thought) — suddenly that’s four teams filling nine of the East’s 12 spots! Then add Jimmy and that’s ten spots. Trae Young made it as a starter last year and he’s a better player on a better team this year, so he has to make it. That’s eleven. Bradley Beal’s making it as the league’s leading scorer — that’s 12! I’m out of room! I’ve got room for none of the guys I was talking about up there! (Which is kind of cool when you think about it; no tie needs to be broken, they just all don’t make it.)
  However, as you see, I had to do one last bit of tinkering, because damn it, the Celtics are just annoyingly bad right now, so to give them two spots seemed a little suspect. And though I hate the argument that Bill Simmons makes, that New York will always be the Knicks’ city no matter how good Brooklyn is, I think a part of me just wanted the most successful Knick in several years to get his daps. So I bumped Tatum with Randle. Why should the Celtics get two players in and the Knicks zero? They’re like a game apart in the standings.(
  I guess it was kind of a vindictive switch. I get the sense Tatum is underachieving; maybe I get this sense from Celtics fan Youtube user AFunkyDiabetic. Whatever it’s from, there’s no denying that the Celtics started the year seemingly at the front of the Eastern Conference, and they have retreated back to the cap. True, Milwaukee seems to be doing the same, but at least the Bucks are still a few games above .500. The Celtics are all the way back. They have been even with the Pacers for most of the last three weeks, and I bumped the Pacers’ guys out of here also (Brogdon’s being so damn good probably hurts Sabonis; since neither one of them is obviously the Pacers’ best player).
  Oh, I’ll say this against the case for Van Vleet, as awesome as he’s been. The Raptors are as low in the standings as are the Heat — same issue where you almost hate to put anybody from their team in. And then unlike the Heat who obviously have one alpha star, the Raptors are just ultra-balanced. Like, Norman Powell might be the most-deserving of All-Star recognition on that team, the way he’s been playing lately. (Fun with basketball-reference … want to know more about Norman Powell? Now you know his age, college he went to, when he was drafted, height, points per game, points per 36 minutes … it’s an awesome site!) But there’s also Pascal Siakam, who remember was an all-star starter last year. There’s just no real reason to recognize any one of the Raptors. Like the Pacers, they’re kind of an ensemble. And to get All-Star nods, an ensemble has to win.
• So that’s it — that’s my list for the East. I do suspect in my determination to pick stars, I may have screwed up, and I’m ignoring Lavine buzz at my own peril; probably Lavine and Bam find their way onto the team … but at whose expense? Trae Young’s? Randle is obviously not safe. I’m afraid my Jimmy pick won’t pan out and it’ll be him on the outside looking in; oh yeah, and Tatum definitely does have a good chance to make it. But he has a decent chance of not making it too. Going to be interesting — and plenty of moaning for whomever gets left out, as if there were unlimited spots. You never know — watch Gordon Hayward slip in there! Would be nuts. Would be hard to claim he doesn’t deserve it.
• Okay so in the West, note that the starting lineup is harder to choose — look how good the West’s starters are! Like, AD can’t make the starting lineup! Jokic took that from him. And while I think Luka over Dame is a bad choice, still if you had told me a month ago that Luka wouldn’t make the starting lineup I would have looked at you funny; it’s understandable that some voters weren’t flexible enough to make that switch. I know that until he got injured, Paul George seemed like somebody who ought not to be overlooked for a starting spot; he was playing that good. He was playing so good that I think he still deserves to be a reserve, and am pretty sure he’ll get the votes. The Clippers are good enough to deserve two players. So are the Lakers. So are the Jazz; I was slow to have Rudy Gobert join Donovan Mitchell on the team, but recently I heard a podcast where they were talking about him as an MVP candidate. Hell, I saw another guy from the Ringer had Mike Conley from the Jazz in there as well; I’ll tell you one thing about Mike Conley — he is seldom among the top quarter of performers per Game Score. I think two is enough; there are lot of players who merit recognition.
• After those top three teams, I don’t think any other team deserves multiple guys, and some of the other best players are obvious. Jokic, Lillard, Doncic, Curry. That’s ten guys right there! So we’re down to two spots available! So … using my rules, we look at the best teams. Phoenix is one of them, and one thing about the Suns, when they drifted toward .500 about a month ago, I think Chris Paul called out his teammates in the press, and then they went on a winning streak. His numbers are as good as anyone’s also; while Devin Booker’s numbers have not really been great. While Booker was on the verge of an all-star nod last year, I don’t see him getting one this year. I think Chris Paul is going to the All-Star game for his … fourth team?
• The next best team is San Antonio. And the best offensive performer for San Antonio has been Demar Derozan. Dude just puts up great numbers; lots of points, lots of assists, good field goal percentage, gets to the line a lot. It’s a total surprise that the Spurs are good; Derozan deserves credit. He’s having a good season.
• That covers all the best teams in the conference. The toughest cuts to this team were the afore-mentioned Booker and maybe Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. SGA is just a cool nickname, and he has gotten a bit better each year, while always playing on interesting teams that usually are surprising people by overachieving a little. Yeah, the Oklahoma City Thunder aren’t really good this year, but they’re better than a lot of us thought they would be. Still, while SGA versus Derozan appears a close contest, I think team wins should trump in this case. (However, you told me I made one mistake in predicting which All-Stars get picked, I would guess these two guys get flipped.)
• More about injuries: C.J. McCollum was definitely going to be deserving until he got injured. Unlike Paul George, he won’t be back in time for the game. He was having a great start before he got hurt; had raised his already-excellent game to another level.
• And yeah, Zion as the Anthony Davis replacement. Over his teammate Brandon Ingram, who’s still very good; also over Sacramento’s De’Aaron Fox, whose team was flirting with relevance a couple weeks ago but then went into a losing skid which really hurt Fox for me. Over Denver’s Jamal Murray, who has a case based mostly on how well he played in the playoffs last year, but who has disappointed this year (until tonight when he dropped 50 on 21-of-25 shooting, including 8 threes, for an effective field-goal percentage of 1.000). So those are some good snubs, but the West has a surprising lack of candidates I guess. Ja Morant would be a candidate if he’d been healthy all year. Zion’s been better, though, and though I worried that maybe I was picking him based on his awesome shooting numbers and scoring efficiency but was ignoring his not-good rebounding numbers and perhaps he’s bad at defense? — I was assured by some dude’s video that no, his defense is fine, really, and if anything he’s not getting the ball enough in New Orleans. They’re doing something wrong in New Orleans; last I looked they were losing to Phoenix in a game they’d controlled for three quarters because they were being outscored 32–7 in the fourth. Let’s go, Van Gundy!