Re: Jay's dream trade
Now this my friends...this is a POST!
Originally posted by Jay@Section204
I can't believe how dense you're being.
The answer to most of your questions is to answer the questions I've been asking you.
You can't use stats to answer any of these questions, by the way. That's circular reasoning. You can't say, "I think player A is a great passer because he has a high ATO." That's backwards logic. The player has a high ATO because he does x, y, and z well. But there are still guys with a high ATO that nobody in their right mind would call a good passer - guys like AJ that can only make the safe pass, for example, and never even try to throw it into the paint.
Can they create their own shot or do they have to rely on a team setting to get shots?
How many 'pet' moves? How good are each of the pet moves? How much of a dropoff to moves B, C, and D?
Do they have 'pet' moves on each side of the basket? From different spots on the court?
How easy is it for the defender to predict which move is coming?
How good are they at drawing fouls, continuing the shot, and hitting FTs?
Playing in a quicker-paced game with more missed shots from both teams would serve to inflate rebounding numbers, so you certainly just can't look at rebounds from guys on two different teams and make any reasonable conclusions. Wilt averaged like 25+ rebounds per game for his career, but I'm not about to say that Ben Wallace is a lousy rebounder because he averages ten (or more) rebounds less per game.
When I'm evaluating a player's rebounding, I'll look for
A nose for the ball.
Ability to block out, keep other players away from the ball.
Hustle.
Playing closer to the basket (e.g. Pacers guards are supposed to get back on defense and will almost never have offensive rebounds, other teams - different approach and different results.)
As a former PG, I've got a pretty good sense for whether or not the passer can find the open man and a passing lane, so that's the first thing I look for. If I can see somebody open, and know how I'd get the ball to him, then I expect NBA players to be able to do that as well. Although Travis could not and AJ struggles with that as well.
The second thing I look for is where the guy at the receiving end of the pass gets the ball. Does he have to reach for it? Does he have to give up post position? Mark Jackson always put the ball in Reggie's hands with the seems already lined up so that Reggie was ready to go right into his shooting motion. Is the pass to a moving player caught in stride, or does the player have to stop. That may not be recorded as a turnover, but its a bad pass that can kill a possession.
Derrick McKey was tall enough to throw a post entry pass that could not be intercepted. Jackson (or Workman) would have to lob the ball and it was easy for the defender to break contact with Rik, get in front of him, and steal it. But Derrick could put zip on it.
Technique is helpful, but we've seen flat-footed guys with a hitch in their stroke that can light it up, so its not everything.
Actually, the best answer is confidence.
The second most important thing is how well they get their legs into the shot, therefore, conditioning is vital.
Defensive schemes help a bunch here. The same defensive player, depending on matchups, may be either defending the post or playing the weakside. The easy example is Detroit, where 'Sheed and Ben can both play either position. But if 'Sheed is defending JO in the paint, and Ben is guarding Foster, he's just going to play goalie and wait until a little guy comes at him.
Further, let me just say that I don't think shot blocking is very important overall in terms of evaluating a player's defensive abilities. A large % of blocked shots are rebounded by the offensive team and converted into layups - especially if the shot blocker's momentum carries him away from the rim, leaving a big gaping seam for the offense to fill.
The first thing I look for is, how well do they play in the fourth quarter? That tells me two things - are they conditioned?, and how to they handle pressure? Next I'd look for their balance between their offensive and defensive games. I hate calling one-dimensional players "great". Thirdly, I'd look for diversity in their offensive game - how many different ways can a player 'hurt you'? Shooting, driving, passing, offensive rebounds, good-quality screens, etc.
Lastly, I'd just look for whether a player "makes plays" or not.
+ + + + +
I'm not saying that stats have no meaning, but (1) they can be misleading, (2) stats never, ever, ever, ever explain why a player is good or bad or anything, and (3) unless you're the player's agent or playing fantasy basketball (and you can ask the guys around here, I'm absolutely awful at fantasy basketball because I'd rather watch real basketball than read boxscores), individual stats don't mean anything. The most important stat is whether or not a player is contributing to wins and losses. But you can't even measure that by individual plus/minus, because that can be influenced by the other players on the court, too.
As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
One of my basketball coaches, who was a math teacher, used to say, "Stats are numbers that are only good for telling lies."
And one of my stats professors in college would say, "Give me a set of data, and I can make it say anything I want." Matter of fact, one of our Managing Directors here is a former stats professer and he's, of course, got a great reputation nationally for his ability to take large volumes of data and manipulate it in ways to help our clients win key litigation cases. I don't think he's working today but I could get him to chime in if you're still overly smitten with stats.
The answer to most of your questions is to answer the questions I've been asking you.
You can't use stats to answer any of these questions, by the way. That's circular reasoning. You can't say, "I think player A is a great passer because he has a high ATO." That's backwards logic. The player has a high ATO because he does x, y, and z well. But there are still guys with a high ATO that nobody in their right mind would call a good passer - guys like AJ that can only make the safe pass, for example, and never even try to throw it into the paint.
Can they create their own shot or do they have to rely on a team setting to get shots?
How many 'pet' moves? How good are each of the pet moves? How much of a dropoff to moves B, C, and D?
Do they have 'pet' moves on each side of the basket? From different spots on the court?
How easy is it for the defender to predict which move is coming?
How good are they at drawing fouls, continuing the shot, and hitting FTs?
Playing in a quicker-paced game with more missed shots from both teams would serve to inflate rebounding numbers, so you certainly just can't look at rebounds from guys on two different teams and make any reasonable conclusions. Wilt averaged like 25+ rebounds per game for his career, but I'm not about to say that Ben Wallace is a lousy rebounder because he averages ten (or more) rebounds less per game.
When I'm evaluating a player's rebounding, I'll look for
A nose for the ball.
Ability to block out, keep other players away from the ball.
Hustle.
Playing closer to the basket (e.g. Pacers guards are supposed to get back on defense and will almost never have offensive rebounds, other teams - different approach and different results.)
As a former PG, I've got a pretty good sense for whether or not the passer can find the open man and a passing lane, so that's the first thing I look for. If I can see somebody open, and know how I'd get the ball to him, then I expect NBA players to be able to do that as well. Although Travis could not and AJ struggles with that as well.
The second thing I look for is where the guy at the receiving end of the pass gets the ball. Does he have to reach for it? Does he have to give up post position? Mark Jackson always put the ball in Reggie's hands with the seems already lined up so that Reggie was ready to go right into his shooting motion. Is the pass to a moving player caught in stride, or does the player have to stop. That may not be recorded as a turnover, but its a bad pass that can kill a possession.
Derrick McKey was tall enough to throw a post entry pass that could not be intercepted. Jackson (or Workman) would have to lob the ball and it was easy for the defender to break contact with Rik, get in front of him, and steal it. But Derrick could put zip on it.
Technique is helpful, but we've seen flat-footed guys with a hitch in their stroke that can light it up, so its not everything.
Actually, the best answer is confidence.
The second most important thing is how well they get their legs into the shot, therefore, conditioning is vital.
Defensive schemes help a bunch here. The same defensive player, depending on matchups, may be either defending the post or playing the weakside. The easy example is Detroit, where 'Sheed and Ben can both play either position. But if 'Sheed is defending JO in the paint, and Ben is guarding Foster, he's just going to play goalie and wait until a little guy comes at him.
Further, let me just say that I don't think shot blocking is very important overall in terms of evaluating a player's defensive abilities. A large % of blocked shots are rebounded by the offensive team and converted into layups - especially if the shot blocker's momentum carries him away from the rim, leaving a big gaping seam for the offense to fill.
The first thing I look for is, how well do they play in the fourth quarter? That tells me two things - are they conditioned?, and how to they handle pressure? Next I'd look for their balance between their offensive and defensive games. I hate calling one-dimensional players "great". Thirdly, I'd look for diversity in their offensive game - how many different ways can a player 'hurt you'? Shooting, driving, passing, offensive rebounds, good-quality screens, etc.
Lastly, I'd just look for whether a player "makes plays" or not.
+ + + + +
I'm not saying that stats have no meaning, but (1) they can be misleading, (2) stats never, ever, ever, ever explain why a player is good or bad or anything, and (3) unless you're the player's agent or playing fantasy basketball (and you can ask the guys around here, I'm absolutely awful at fantasy basketball because I'd rather watch real basketball than read boxscores), individual stats don't mean anything. The most important stat is whether or not a player is contributing to wins and losses. But you can't even measure that by individual plus/minus, because that can be influenced by the other players on the court, too.
As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
One of my basketball coaches, who was a math teacher, used to say, "Stats are numbers that are only good for telling lies."
And one of my stats professors in college would say, "Give me a set of data, and I can make it say anything I want." Matter of fact, one of our Managing Directors here is a former stats professer and he's, of course, got a great reputation nationally for his ability to take large volumes of data and manipulate it in ways to help our clients win key litigation cases. I don't think he's working today but I could get him to chime in if you're still overly smitten with stats.
Comment