you don't really need to go more than 9 deep anyway.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 00:05 (twelve years ago) link
They have an above average bench and an above average team.
― polyphonic, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 00:11 (twelve years ago) link
yeah top 2 is crazy. That's a huge assumption of amazing chemistry. Their run last year was no fluke but the west is so rough.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 01:18 (twelve years ago) link
denvers got prob the best bench in the nba, tho maybe the bulls would have something to say abt that, plus theyll be getting those shanghaied guys back, not that i agree w/seeding them 2nd, tho i do find the compressed season theory behind it compelling
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 02:41 (twelve years ago) link
feel like denver finishing 2nd is something that would be really cool and that ppl would want to happen more than anything.
hollingers whole preview speaks to the fact that the west is pretty wide open besides the fact that okc will be a huge disappointment if they don't finish first and make a deep run.
― cad, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 02:52 (twelve years ago) link
Could OKC withstand injuries and still make a run at the top spot this year? I suspect not.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 02:55 (twelve years ago) link
looking at the west i don't really think there's any team that could withstand injuries and make a serious run!
― cad, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 02:56 (twelve years ago) link
hollingers whole preview speaks to the fact that the west is pretty wide open
― cad, Tuesday, December 20, 2011 9:52 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
yeah srsly 6 wins differential projected between 2nd and 8th
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 03:00 (twelve years ago) link
haha this season is so funny, kinda feel like they should fuck w/the schedule and cba every year just to make it more interesting
lol u have some vendetta against hollinger bro? those projections are computerized, and he sometimes says if he thinks his projections will be off one way or another
― k3vin k., Tuesday, December 20, 2011 1:30 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Permalink
"computerized?" It's based on a formula he cooked up, if the results are BS it's his fault.
I think Hollinger is a fraud, yes.
― Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, December 20, 2011 7:02 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Permalink
its obvs not perfect and the formula does sometimes err wildly but cherry picking one guy is kinda missing the point
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 03:02 (twelve years ago) link
― cad, Tuesday, December 20, 2011 9:56 PM (5 minutes ago)
this is basketball, no team can withstand a serious injury and make a serious run
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 21 December 2011 03:02 (twelve years ago) link
xp most of the "projections" differ from the player's last 2 seasons numbers by what, 5%? if you're reading the player profiles for his projections, ur doin it rong
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 21 December 2011 03:04 (twelve years ago) link
yeah there are some teams who have good back ups at an important positions, like the bulls could prob lose noah and not be much worse, but extended injuries to key guys are generally p devastating xp
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 03:05 (twelve years ago) link
damn, I missed nba so much. I am actually about to watch some of Golden State vs. Sac Kings exhibition game, lol.
― Hurting, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 03:38 (twelve years ago) link
― k3vin k., Tuesday, December 20, 2011 9:04 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Permalink
His whole rep is based on stats! If you read Hollinger for actual game analysis ur REALLY doing it wrong.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:08 (twelve years ago) link
ur both doing it wrong, check out how i do it *does it right*
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:10 (twelve years ago) link
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Tuesday, December 20, 2011 9:02 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Permalink
There is no point. It's a worthless formula, just like PER is a worthless formula.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:10 (twelve years ago) link
per was rated the most predictive of irl wins out of any stat in this study i read fwiw
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:11 (twelve years ago) link
average per of a team's players?
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:12 (twelve years ago) link
im sure it was weighted by minutes but yeah basically
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:13 (twelve years ago) link
any idea where I can read it?
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:14 (twelve years ago) link
i mean i dont really remember the specifics but it mustve been something like that - ill try to dig it up for you using deep googling - but just not right now
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:15 (twelve years ago) link
they concluded the best judgement of player quality was how many minutes they got, aka coaches knew better than any stat which players were good, but out of the stats per was the best
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:17 (twelve years ago) link
Paul Millsapp had the 5th best PER last year... There's cherry picking and then there's picking a cherry the size of a watermelon.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:17 (twelve years ago) link
yeah its far from perfect, but i do think there are lots of players that it judges more accurately than the prevailing wisdom, obvs its p much useless as far as defense goes - and milsap is 29th on list im looking at fwiw
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:21 (twelve years ago) link
yeah I fucked up on basketball reference somehow
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:21 (twelve years ago) link
the worst part of PER is that it rewards taking more shots on a lower percentage (which to me means being LESS efficient), which is why it shits on a guy like Afflalo.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:22 (twelve years ago) link
like kevin martin top 20 gtfo
well it considers usage which imo is necessary because there are guys who only take a few open threes a game, which are not looks a first scoring option on team will get, besides that tho its all abt efficiency, which is why martin is rated so high, he scores tons points on v few shots
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:26 (twelve years ago) link
but yeah it for sure over rates martin
― Cooper Chucklebutt, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:27 (twelve years ago) link
I don't know how anyone could scroll through the top 200 PER list and not think "this stat is broken."
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:27 (twelve years ago) link
tyrus thomas is 51st and afflalo is 176th.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:28 (twelve years ago) link
it's not an efficiency measure at all, it's an efficacy measure.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:33 (twelve years ago) link
(and not a great one)
like why is tyrus 51st? Cuz when he's on the court a lot of shit happens. None of the shit that happens is efficient.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:39 (twelve years ago) link
curry down
― moonbop, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:39 (twelve years ago) link
ugh his ankles are made of confetti.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:49 (twelve years ago) link
― Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, December 20, 2011 11:08 PM (44 minutes ago)
the stats he uses/invents are an attempt to quantify what he sees with his own eyes - and his analysis of strategy/player skills is very good, you're fronting iud - in fact this is essentially what any statistic does!
as ice says PER is not a perfect stat but it is the best single stat that exists, which is the entire justification for its existence in the first place!
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 21 December 2011 04:57 (twelve years ago) link
like when espn did that player rankings countdown he wrote a column saying why he thought rose had a better year than cp3 even though paul had a marginally better PER - and then followed it up with research into cp3's assist quality which he included in his player profile - the guy is not some robot deluded by his own genius, in fact he's totally self-aware and very funny which is another reason he is awesome
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:03 (twelve years ago) link
you have it backwards, his belief in PER leads him to have some really delusional player evaluations.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:09 (twelve years ago) link
If he sees some guy who has a high PER and isn't getting playing time he absolutely rips into their GM/Coach (I think he's even done this with Tyrus!)
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:14 (twelve years ago) link
is not a perfect stat but it is the best single stat that exists― k3vin k., Tuesday, December 20, 2011 10:57 PM (17 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
It is arguably the best single stat used by ESPN.com, sure. I'm sure the Mavs front office has 20 stats that blow it out of the fucking water.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:17 (twelve years ago) link
not everyone is right all the time dude! he is the best basketball writer there is & a force for good in the universe!
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:18 (twelve years ago) link
It's not about a batting average, it's about a stat guru who designed a "player efficiency rating" that doesn't reward efficiency.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:23 (twelve years ago) link
in what universe is Afflalo not one of the most efficient players? It's just bizarre that he kept that as the name. Bizarre and pretty dumb
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:24 (twelve years ago) link
he's not a bad writer per se and I actually agree with him a lot in terms of his opinions that aren't stat-driven. But his stats are junk.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:25 (twelve years ago) link
btw apparently we're going to be seeing a "disgusting and graphic" photo of monta ellis soon.
― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:29 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.ibabuzz.com/warriors/2011/12/20/monta-ellis-warriors-to-be-in-sexual-harrassment-suit/#respond
gee last year for example he played starters minutes but didn't score, rebound, or assist particularly well, when he decided to shoot he was pretty effective but when you're playing 34 minutes a game and averaging a 12.6/3.6/2.4 as a 6-5 guard you're pretty much an average player on offense when it comes to like, making your team score points which is what wins basketball games. he is a very 'efficient' player but given his low usage rate he's not an especially effective player - what you said upthread is otm in this case, lol semantics tho
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:38 (twelve years ago) link
I was going to say, he has a nice TS% but he's pretty average or even subpar in most ways.
― milo z, Wednesday, 21 December 2011 05:40 (twelve years ago) link