Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Interesting +/- info

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Interesting +/- info

    Originally posted by Kestas View Post
    I'd disagree.. NBA is ruled by some extremely good streetballers. even the champions are led by a streetballer.. teamplay is irrelevant as long as players can create wins simply out of improvisation and personal skill. NBA is primitive by nature and it rarely relies on teamplay both on deffense and on offense...
    Then you are wrong. There are plenty of examples of streetballers who can't make it in the NBA. And your disdain for the NBA is already clear, you don't need to keep pointing it out.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Interesting +/- info

      Yes, he had nice stats and was a beast when he was on the court, but other 4 players in a unit didn't play very good as we see all teams play when Scot played.
      As Goldfoot mentioned there are TWO TEAMS ON THE COURT.

      If Scot faces Dwight Howard and his backup faces the 12th man NBADL call-up with the game out of hand, and the Magic scrubs then give up 10 points of the 25 point lead, Scot's replacement who didn't see a minute of PT till the game was "over" now has a +10 and Scot (with the pretend numbers that Goldfoot posted) has a -25.


      I said this at Star and I'll say it here too for all the people that are clinging to the one stat that supports Sarunas (since the others are mostly pretty ugly...gee, wonder why +/- got popular lately):

      BEN WALLACE = WORST BULLS PLAYER (other than 2 guys who've each played 5 total minutes all year).

      Now go ahead, defend that Big Ben makes his team worse when he's on the court. Tell me how the Bulls know it and would gladly trade him for Baston and his better +/-.

      Until you sincerely think that Ben Wallace shouldn't get off the bench for the Bulls and in NO WAY helped them beat the Pacers earlier this year you aren't allowed to use the +/- stat as the ONLY MEANS of discussing a player's ability.


      Plus-Minus ignores matchups, ignores situations, ignores if you are riding Jordan's jock or forced to help his backup not blow the game when he turns the ball over 10 times in 5 minutes...

      Like all stats, Plus-Minus requires context and additional statistical analysis. It is also extremely important that you pair it with actual viewings of the games. Best yet is to look at a +/- and then review the game with that in mind. Rick uses this and many other stats, but then he's also at the games, knows what plays were intended vs executed, and sees the players during practice. He doesn't just take one of his stats (any of the many he keeps) and use it to make a lineup, and there is a very good reason for that.

      Reviewing the game with this stat in mind can help a person identify hidden trends, such as the mythical "makes others better even though his stats aren't good" or "hurts the team despite filling the box score". Both cases are rare, but it could be that a crappy PG doesn't get to be involved in plays and that THIS helps the other 4 more than his actual play.

      I already listed a sequence where this did occur for Sarunas. It happens with players you dislike as well, including Jack, Tinsley, Al, Foster, JO...all of them have moments where their +/- does not reflect their actual impact on the game.

      The assumption is that over the long haul it does. But that is because the "long haul" implies a VARIETY of matchups, situations and roles for the player. You assume that over many minutes, say 15-20 games, that all main players (15-20 mpg+) end up being asked to face similar situations. Hot bench guys get to replace struggling starters, for example, and if they can't hack it any better then their +/- drops due to the increase in opponents talent when they are playing.


      BTW, the "bad team" thing is typically "avoided" (it's not because of the flaws I listed, but its an attempt to fix it) by doing the +/- as an ON-COURT/OFF-COURT differential.

      So Joe Johnson could have a big negative +/- since the Hawks stink, but they could be even worse when he isn't on the court which gives him a DIFFERENTIAL in the positive, meaning they don't stink as much with him as without him. 82Games posts this as a main version of the individual +/-.


      And I like the stat, just like I like many other stats. I just think like any other it is easily abused when context and contradictory stats are ignored.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Interesting +/- info

        Originally posted by Kestas View Post
        I'd disagree.. NBA is ruled by some extremely good streetballers. even the champions are led by a streetballer.. teamplay is irrelevant as long as players can create wins simply out of improvisation and personal skill. NBA is primitive by nature and it rarely relies on teamplay both on deffense and on offense...
        Could you at least PRETEND to watch some NBA games?

        For example - Battie hit 2 jumpers in the first the other night. Why? The Magic ran a high PnR with Howard/Nelson, Battie in the low post. Al on Battie, Tins/JO on the PnR.

        Well JO is forced to help as Nelson rolls to the lane (normal move, Howard is a solid pick and Tins must go over to respect the shot) and Al then must defend Howard when he slips to the paint. Tinsley follows Nelson with the understanding that once JO cuts off dribble he will rotate back to Howard which in turn frees Al.

        Battie though slips out to his mid-range jumper distance and gets the pass back from Nelson. It's a set play that forces GOOD DEFENSE into a tough spot. How? TEAM PLAY. It wasn't luck, it was a set that they ran and then ran some more.

        This is TYPICAL of winning NBA ball. Winning, not all. You see AI or Wade break guys down and think that's what it's all about. Try watching a few Jazz games instead.

        Maybe the NBA sets are just run to fast for you or something, because they are being run even if you think they aren't (and I obviously get tired of the "NBA stinks" insults). Few teams even settle for ONLY the PnR, most sets use the low post, give and go and PnR as PART of the bigger play, the first option that leads to something else.

        When defense blows a play up, or a mishandle or bad pass does, then you will see teams panic and force one on one action to save the end of the clock. A strong PG/ball control leader will reset for another set, even if it has to go quick due to the shot clock situation (like getting at least a screen and pop set up).

        NBA defense is too good for teams that don't do these things. The Pacers get almost nothing from 1 on 1 plays on winning nights. Guys aren't "just open", action away from the ball made it happen.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Interesting +/- info

          Thanks Seth. I think Pitons is only baiting me at this point. I don't see how I could be any more clear on my points.

          This is where it says the unit of Tins,JO, Jack,Granger & Al have the best +/- as a 5 man group.

          Without the Pollard performance his team isn't in a position to take the lead at the end.

          Every other player who saw the court as a Hawk last year had better +/- stats than Al & Johnson. It didn't matter whether they played 4 seconds or 48 minutes a game all Hawks performed better than Al & Johnson on the +/- stat.

          Pierce owns everybody he plays. He was held under 20 points 13 times last year and never held under 15 in 79 games. In fact the last time he was held under 15 points was in game one of round one in the '04-'05 playoffs by the Pacers. He scored 12 in a 102-82 Celtics win.
          I'm in these bands
          The Humans
          Dr. Goldfoot
          The Bar Brawlers
          ME

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Interesting +/- info

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            As Goldfoot mentioned there are TWO TEAMS ON THE COURT.

            If Scot faces Dwight Howard and his backup faces the 12th man NBADL call-up with the game out of hand, and the Magic scrubs then give up 10 points of the 25 point lead, Scot's replacement who didn't see a minute of PT till the game was "over" now has a +10 and Scot (with the pretend numbers that Goldfoot posted) has a -25.
            So I'm asking and not first time: Where's the problem? Scrubs, who usually beat other teams scrubs, or starters, who have -25 against other teams' starters? With those things I could even ask a question - maybe scrubs wouldn't be so worse than starters and would have -27 playing against other teams' starters. Not much of difference between starters and "scrubs". Starters, who can't play against other starters. Very nice.

            And as I said and will repeat - +/- is useful in a longer period.


            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            BEN WALLACE = WORST BULLS PLAYER (other than 2 guys who've each played 5 total minutes all year).
            Actually he's 4th best player in Bulls. Deng, Hinrich and Gordon play better. 4th, not 12th. I said, that to see who are the best, you must glance only at players, who play much time, not 5 or 15 minutes (about 30 min or more).

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Now go ahead, defend that Big Ben makes his team worse when he's on the court. Tell me how the Bulls know it and would gladly trade him for Baston and his better +/-.
            Baston played only 4 games 3 min average. Too less PT to say he would play better than Big Ben. And 2 more important thing - the teams are different, so they can't be compared with +/-. I mentioned that earlier too.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Until you sincerely think that Ben Wallace shouldn't get off the bench for the Bulls and in NO WAY helped them beat the Pacers earlier this year you aren't allowed to use the +/- stat as the ONLY MEANS of discussing a player's ability.
            The stat maybe useless in one game. It is useful in a longer term. I explained that when I talked about bad DG game and his +/-.




            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Plus-Minus ignores matchups, ignores situations, ignores if you are riding Jordan's jock or forced to help his backup not blow the game when he turns the ball over 10 times in 5 minutes...
            Yes, that's why it's players stat regarding team play. If a player with good +/- is the worst player in the world and is only the liability, so why other players, when they play without him, have worse +/- stat? They should play 10 times better without him and just smash other teams with ease and should have far better +/-. But I don't see this happen for now.
            I don't say, that player, who plays 15 minutes, is the best player in the team, but if after more games he has good +/-, that means he helps the team somehow, despite his very ugly 3 turnovers.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Like all stats, Plus-Minus requires context and additional statistical analysis. It is also extremely important that you pair it with actual viewings of the games. Best yet is to look at a +/- and then review the game with that in mind. Rick uses this and many other stats, but then he's also at the games, knows what plays were intended vs executed, and sees the players during practice. He doesn't just take one of his stats (any of the many he keeps) and use it to make a lineup, and there is a very good reason for that.
            Exactly. Maybe RC thinks Saras can play only 15 min. Maybe that's true. And all stats are useful, every little thing in the game too.
            I just wanted to prove, that +/- is not absolutely useless when I saw many people saying +/- stat is BS.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Reviewing the game with this stat in mind can help a person identify hidden trends, such as the mythical "makes others better even though his stats aren't good" or "hurts the team despite filling the box score". Both cases are rare, but it could be that a crappy PG doesn't get to be involved in plays and that THIS helps the other 4 more than his actual play.
            If his crappy play helps others to play better (to be more responsible let's say, more active), I say, way to go.
            Good leader doesn't work. He makes others to work for him. And to work very good. He just somehow makes them do it better. That's a very good leadership.
            It's better to have that type of leader than a very "clever" leader , who wants to do all work alone and others aren't involved as they should and the team losses.


            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            I already listed a sequence where this did occur for Sarunas. It happens with players you dislike as well, including Jack, Tinsley, Al, Foster, JO...all of them have moments where their +/- does not reflect their actual impact on the game.
            Yea, like I said, Saras is not the best player and don't know if he could be on this team.

            And if JO, Al, Tins have bad +/- in their 30-35 minutes of play, it means they aren't so good and the team losses.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            So Joe Johnson could have a big negative +/- since the Hawks stink, but they could be even worse when he isn't on the court which gives him a DIFFERENTIAL in the positive, meaning they don't stink as much with him as without him. 82Games posts this as a main version of the individual +/-.
            Joe Johnson is 1-2 best player in his team with Childress. I say 1st, because he plays 12 min longer.


            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            And I like the stat, just like I like many other stats. I just think like any other it is easily abused when context and contradictory stats are ignored.
            Agree 100 %. That's what I'm talking about. +/- don't say everything. Other stats also. But if there's a player, who can force somehow others play better when he plays crap, it's not so bad.

            And all this **** started when I saw everyone claim +/- is absolutely BS and is a joke not a stat.
            "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

            - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Interesting +/- info

              Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
              Thanks Seth. I think Pitons is only baiting me at this point. I don't see how I could be any more clear on my points.

              This is where it says the unit of Tins,JO, Jack,Granger & Al have the best +/- as a 5 man group.
              +15 in 10 games? Come on, man...

              Btw, glance at http://www.82games.com/0607/0607IND2.HTM.

              Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
              Every other player who saw the court as a Hawk last year had better +/- stats than Al & Johnson. It didn't matter whether they played 4 seconds or 48 minutes a game all Hawks performed better than Al & Johnson on the +/- stat.
              I would want to see those stats. How many players played around 30 min and more and how many minutes played Al and Johnson?

              If Al and other guy played 35 min and other guy had a far better (not by 5 points in 82 games) than yes, I would think Al was the worst player regarding the team (that means he played alone and other players just watched how he scores his points) on the team amongst who played much time.
              Better to have 5 average players, who play good with each other than 1 very good individually and others only look how he play alone.

              Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
              Pierce owns everybody he plays. He was held under 20 points 13 times last year and never held under 15 in 79 games. In fact the last time he was held under 15 points was in game one of round one in the '04-'05 playoffs by the Pacers. He scored 12 in a 102-82 Celtics win.
              He scored 50 points 5 times in a row, he never scored less than 10 points and so on and so on. But we are talking about team play, how the team competes as a unit and the most important thing - the team should win. Better to have 10 players score 10 points each and the team wins, than 1 players scores 50 points, others score 20 points and the team losses.

              Btw, I don't know how about last season, but this season he's the best Celtics player.
              "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

              - Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Interesting +/- info

                10 games ....that's all they've played. The 82games stats are also derived from 10 games. I don't see how that discredits the Lenova +/- but not the 82games stats. On a side note, the 82games stats you are citing are not +/- but a stat developed to decipher who wins the game within the game. According to the stats you're linking to, a group of players can lose by 1, then the next time lose by 1 and then win by 3 and have a winning % of .333 . +/- stats would show a +1 not a winning %. They're two different statistical outcomes based on the same formula, one shows who wins more and one shows who scores more. One is a per appearance basis and the other is a running tally.

                The Atlanta stats, which are here by the way, include the whole team. Who played how many minutes doesn't affect where Al Harington and Joe Johnson fall on the list. Every other player is above them Zaza(31.4 mpg),Josh Smith(31.8 mpg)Josh Childress(30.4) even Tony Delk who only played 7 minutes as a Hawk. The Hawks were outscored more when Al & Johnson were in the game than any other player. Of course they also had 5 guys who averaged 25 or more minutes a game that performed better in the +/- stat. Due to the fact Atlanta was a horrible team, all of the guys who logged major minutes have major negatives but not as negative as Al & Joe.

                The Pierce debate is about how he affects the other team. I don't care if he's a ball hogging shot chucker. He's unstoppable. If you get to face the Celtics when he's out of the game you'll likely get a better +/- than the guys who had to face him. Just like when Iverson is out or KG or Wade or Lebron, the teams are truely built around those players that's why they log so many minutes because they can't win without them. If you get to face their teams when the team objective goes from "get the ball to Paul" to "just don't screw this up while Paul takes a 5 minute breather" you will more times than not get a +. If you go out when these guys come back in his abilty to carry his team will never affect your numbers.

                I'm sure coaches across the land refer to the +/- stats and a variety of other statistical compositions to help them in their quest to win. I know of no stats that measures how a guy who never sees the court affects his teams play. I know of no stat that measures how a guy can keep the other teams sparkplug from ever igniting and getting his team to rally. Sometimes a game plan is based solely on doing that. "Keep Jordan from beating us" make Steve Kerr or Randy Brown or Ron Harper prove that they can. "Sure Odom is gonna get his but if we can stop Kobe from getting this team on his shoulders and running away with it we'll be there at the end with a chance to win." Every once in a while those role players do get it going and that can eliminate somebody completely shutting down a star player.
                I'm in these bands
                The Humans
                Dr. Goldfoot
                The Bar Brawlers
                ME

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Interesting +/- info

                  Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                  I'm sure coaches across the land refer to the +/- stats and a variety of other statistical compositions to help them in their quest to win.
                  That's all I wanted to hear. Not that +/- is absolutely BS.
                  "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                  - Albert Einstein

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Interesting +/- info

                    And about Al. I see now those +/- on http://www.82games.com/0506/0506ATL1.HTM.

                    Actually, all first players played crap and the +/- is very close in 1 game. Smith had even worse in 48 min than Al and Joe. Even some scrubs had a worse stat.

                    You have to see +/- in 48 min, not overall like showed at Lenovo stat. Of course, if the team losses and the more minutes player plays, the worse +/- he has.
                    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                    - Albert Einstein

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Interesting +/- info

                      The only stats I care about are individual stats-not +/- or 48 minute or anything else.I rate players by their ability to do more than one thing. For example Howard is now becoming a 20-20 guy in points and rebounds which is unheard of. To be a superstar at PF, 20-10 is required. A great PG not only has to have close to double digit assists but double digit points. someone like Kidd could be a triple double on any night. IMO guys who stand out must do so in at least 2 categories and if not in two categories must be really excellent in one such as AI who can put up 30 points a game or Kobe who can do the same.

                      So on the Pacers JO is really the only star we have. Artest was good for points and even better in taking away points from the other team. No one has to look at all the other stuff. If you get 10 assists, 10 rebounds, or 5-6 blocked shots a game you are helping the team period.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Interesting +/- info

                        Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                        The only stats I care about are individual stats-not +/- or 48 minute or anything else.I rate players by their ability to do more than one thing. For example Howard is now becoming a 20-20 guy in points and rebounds which is unheard of. To be a superstar at PF, 20-10 is required. A great PG not only has to have close to double digit assists but double digit points. someone like Kidd could be a triple double on any night. IMO guys who stand out must do so in at least 2 categories and if not in two categories must be really excellent in one such as AI who can put up 30 points a game or Kobe who can do the same.

                        So on the Pacers JO is really the only star we have. Artest was good for points and even better in taking away points from the other team. No one has to look at all the other stuff. If you get 10 assists, 10 rebounds, or 5-6 blocked shots a game you are helping the team period.
                        Maybe it's helping him, but not teamplay. Maybe other guys are playing worse with that guy than they could and the team losses.
                        Individual stats are useful, but there are more things in the game than only individual stats.
                        "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                        - Albert Einstein

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Interesting +/- info

                          Originally posted by Pitons View Post
                          Maybe it's helping him, but not teamplay. Maybe other guys are playing worse with that guy than they could and the team losses.
                          Individual stats are useful, but there are more things in the game than only individual stats.

                          How can points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocked shots not help the team????

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Interesting +/- info

                            Speakout has a great point.

                            +/- is far too complicated and can make a mediocre player seem better than he is or a bonafide star seems less than.

                            Per 48 is a fantasy stat. If Armstong had to play 48 minutes would he hit the ground running like he does when he's only getting 5-15 minutes.

                            I too would take a 20-10 guy or 35 a night guy or a 15 boards 5 blocks guy or a 10 assists 10 points guy or a triple double threat or an excellent defender over what any of those other stats say.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Interesting +/- info

                              Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                              How can points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocked shots not help the team????
                              It helps, I didn't say it doesn't, but maybe with that player others can't play that good that they are able. Maybe he plays alone and the team losses despite his 50 points.
                              The team should be a strong unit, the players must understand each other to make each other better.
                              "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                              - Albert Einstein

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Interesting +/- info

                                Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                                Speakout has a great point.

                                +/- is far too complicated and can make a mediocre player seem better than he is or a bonafide star seems less than.

                                Per 48 is a fantasy stat. If Armstong had to play 48 minutes would he hit the ground running like he does when he's only getting 5-15 minutes.

                                I too would take a 20-10 guy or 35 a night guy or a 15 boards 5 blocks guy or a 10 assists 10 points guy or a triple double threat or an excellent defender over what any of those other stats say.
                                Yes, +/- is more a team stat.

                                You can take 20-10 guy, but you can never have a TEAM which wins. A team is more than individual stats.
                                "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                                - Albert Einstein

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X