PG: We won Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

Larry got away with a few body fouls in this one, maybe the ref respect is paying off. I hope it continues.

I meant to point out how well he's been handling the referees himself as well this season. I'm almost to the point where I don't worry when he has a questionable call.

He's definitely making a point of totally holding back. You can see in his face how hard it is for him too. If he can keep it up it'll be huge for his future, GOS for a start will have to like him.

Also Parker is a crazy athlete, I can't believe people thought that was a weakness in him.

from what were able to see on tv he seems to be doing better. im not sure i'll ever "like" him tho. i think with good behavior I could definitely more easily tolerate him..... but I still find him to be laughably overrated as a basketballer. his shortcomings and the imbalances he causes against us on the floor on a semi regular basis are not nearly discussed enough on this board.

but whatever... ive figured out that it isn't going to be me that's the guy to always bring it up anymore. for this game i'll just say it was nice to play the wolves without pek. usually he demolishes us with no resistance inside whatsoever. it was nice to see sanders alter the game defensively against a weak team with no inside presence. I did enjoy that in this one as you all did.

[LUKE23]

You think Sanders causes imbalance, but also think Knight is a major asset to our currently ranked 27th offense? Here is the reason Sanders is highly regarded by fans and every basketball analyst that is knowledgeable; he majorly impacts defense in dozens of advanced analytics and our defense is actually good. All the positive things said about Knight haven't shown up with anything measurable on the end of the floor he is supposed to impact. In fact, the advanced stats for Knight are still ugly for the most part outside of the improvement in his individual efficiency. It's just unfortunate that you choose to ignore or tout the advanced stats for a player based on whether you personally like them or not.

I guess my primary point is that moving forward Sanders is clearly ahead of Knight on the "keeper" pecking order.

[AussieBuck]

Sanders is crap on one end and elite on the other, Knight is bad on his good end.

[Bucks_MacGyver]

Sanders defense is going to impact 8 wins alone

[PedroGrande]

I still dont understand why people still undervalue good Defense. 50% of the game is played on that end, so It has the same impact as a good offensive player. Yes, its not as pretty. Its easier to find? On a good level yes, on an elite level not as much.

So please someone explain it to me: Why does a good defender that impacts 5Points per 100 possessions for example on that end is worse than one that impacts 5 PP100 on the Offensive end inf both have the same bad impact on the opposite end?

[Bucks_MacGyver]

I still dont understand why people still undervalue good Defenders. 50% of the game is played on that end, so It has the same impact as a good offensive player. Yes, its not as pretty. Its easier to find? On a good level yes, on an elite level not as much.

So please someone explain it to me: Why does a good defender that impacts 5Points per 100 possessions for example on that end is worse than one that impacts 5 PP100 on the Offensive end inf both have the same bad impact on the opposite end?

That's why fans are fans and not the coach or the gm. Just like the spurs with splitter might not show in the stats but they are good team without him but with him in the lineup they are a championship caliber team

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

You think Sanders causes imbalance, but also think Knight is a major asset to our currently ranked 27th offense? Here is the reason Sanders is highly regarded by fans and every basketball analyst that is knowledgeable; he majorly impacts defense in dozens of advanced analytics and our defense is actually good. All the positive things said about Knight haven't shown up with anything measurable on the end of the floor he is supposed to impact. In fact, the advanced stats for Knight are still ugly for the most part outside of the improvement in his individual efficiency. It's just unfortunate that you choose to ignore or tout the advanced stats for a player based on whether you personally like them or not.

I guess my primary point is that moving forward Sanders is clearly ahead of Knight on the "keeper" pecking order.

my motivation is about upside. knight has a load of it and sanders has none. its about improvement. knight is showing consistent improvement and sanders has had one really good year out of five.

if I felt sanders defense influenced games against teams with an inside presence the way he does against the teams that are weak inside it would be a different story. but bottom line is if pek plays the other night were a significantly better team offensively AND comparatively the same defensively if zaza is taking the court. sanders is a niche string bean defender who completely sucks on offense. hes a part time player on this team today..... and hell be a part time player in the future. people need to look beyond his rapm and grasp this simple concept.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

Sanders defense is going to impact 8 wins alone

yes.. I agree with this. he feasts on teams with no inside presence and gives a strong defensive advantage.

unfortunately in matchups against strong centers with some ass we may as well be trotting out a life size paper poster of him. this will become more of a problem as the tam improves and we try to make that jump from .500 to a team people take seriously come playoff time when games turn much more physical.

[sidney lanier]

I still dont understand why people still undervalue good Defense. 50% of the game is played on that end, so It has the same impact as a good offensive player. Yes, its not as pretty. Its easier to find? On a good level yes, on an elite level not as much.

So please someone explain it to me: Why does a good defender that impacts 5Points per 100 possessions for example on that end is worse than one that impacts 5 PP100 on the Offensive end inf both have the same bad impact on the opposite end?

Because the only place in which offense and defense are considered equally important in professional basketball is in the minds of those who contrive what are non-ironically referred to as advanced stats.

If we lived in a world of hand checks, never touching the ball below the equator when dribbling, no 3-point line, no NBA step, and no restricted area—in other words, if the rules of the game were such that defensive and offensive skills were more equally valuable than they are now—then there might be room for discussing the possible equivalence of the importance of offensive and defensive skills. But we don't. We live in this world:



As for the apparent equivalent "impacts" you mention (5 points/100 possessions on either end, say), what you're looking at is statistical noise. These stats have so many dependent and confounding variables that the numbers thrown off by the simple algorithms of advanced statters are pretty meaningless, however symmetrical, elegantly contrived, and intellectually satisfying to those who don't understand how the mathematical discipline of statistics works.

I realize that these are fighting words in these parts, but I have Town Marshal M. Perical on my side. He says advanced stats are non-falsifiable in the Popperian sense and therefore operate in a world more aspirational than real. I agree with him.

[LUKE23]

Nope, he's a full time player. Only thing holding him back is Kidd or fouls. And there are like 2 or 3 post up bigs in the league that kill Sanders, that's it. The notion that the NBA is littered with 270 pound back to the basket studs is crazy.

Sanders is one of the best overall defenders in basketball. If you liked him as a person, you'd say the same.

[paulpressey25]

Parker of the last 5 games isn't the same defender as the one of the first 10.

That's the amazing thing. His last few games have been significantly better. If he can keep that up, it's going to be huge for the Bucks.

Add in the passes he's making and it all starts to add up to what we hoped he could be.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

I still dont understand why people still undervalue good Defense. 50% of the game is played on that end, so It has the same impact as a good offensive player. Yes, its not as pretty. Its easier to find? On a good level yes, on an elite level not as much.

So please someone explain it to me: Why does a good defender that impacts 5Points per 100 possessions for example on that end is worse than one that impacts 5 PP100 on the Offensive end inf both have the same bad impact on the opposite end?

Because the only place in which offense and defense are considered equally important in professional basketball is in the minds of those who contrive what are non-ironically referred to as advanced stats.

If we lived in a world of hand checks, never touching the ball below the equator when dribbling, no 3-point line, no NBA step, and no restricted area—in other words, if the rules of the game were such that defensive and offensive skills were more equally valuable than they are now—then there might be room for discussing the possible equivalence of the importance of offensive and defensive skills. But we don't. We live in this world:



As for the apparent equivalent "impacts" you mention (5 points/100 possessions on either end, say), what you're looking at is statistical noise. These stats have so many dependent and confounding variables that the numbers thrown off by the simple algorithms of advanced statters are pretty meaningless, however symmetrical, elegantly contrived, and intellectually satisfying to those who don't understand how the mathematical discipline of statistics works.

I realize that these are fighting words in these parts, but I have Town Marshal M. Perical on my side. He says advanced stats are non-falsifiable in the Popperian sense and therefore operate in a world more aspirational than real. I agree with him.

great great post.... right on down to the correct assumption that you will be mocked for it.

[paulpressey25]

And there are like 2 or 3 post up bigs in the league that kill Sanders

It is more than 2 or 3 (you guys can list them out) That's why the ZaZa has been so important for this team in that he gives them a bigger body and an outside jump shot.

But yes, he's a tremendous defender. No argument there.

[PedroGrande]

I still dont understand why people still undervalue good Defense. 50% of the game is played on that end, so It has the same impact as a good offensive player. Yes, its not as pretty. Its easier to find? On a good level yes, on an elite level not as much.

So please someone explain it to me: Why does a good defender that impacts 5Points per 100 possessions for example on that end is worse than one that impacts 5 PP100 on the Offensive end inf both have the same bad impact on the opposite end?

Because the only place in which offense and defense are considered equally important in professional basketball is in the minds of those who contrive what are non-ironically referred to as advanced stats.

If we lived in a world of hand checks, never touching the ball below the equator when dribbling, no 3-point line, no NBA step, and no restricted area—in other words, if the rules of the game were such that defensive and offensive skills were more equally valuable than they are now—then there might be room for discussing the possible equivalence of the importance of offensive and defensive skills. But we don't. We live in this world:



As for the apparent equivalent "impacts" you mention (5 points/100 possessions on either end, say), what you're looking at is statistical noise. These stats have so many dependent and confounding variables that the numbers thrown off by the simple algorithms of advanced statters are pretty meaningless, however symmetrical, elegantly contrived, and intellectually satisfying to those who don't understand how the mathematical discipline of statistics works.

I realize that these are fighting words in these parts, but I have Town Marshal M. Perical on my side. He says advanced stats are non-falsifiable in the Popperian sense and therefore operate in a world more aspirational than real. I agree with him.

You didn't understand I guess. I'm using the 5point/100 possessions not as the stat we can get right now (I agree it has a lot of noise influencing it, mostly in small and medium samples) but pretending we for some kind of magic could get a number the real number of that impact (yeah its a team game, and the way X player works with Y is different of the number he gets with Z even if Y and Z have exactly the same impact but lets ignore it for a little bit, its not related to the point i'm trying to make). I know you are very defensive about stats (wonder why) but i wasn't even using it or being pro / against them but you decided to attack my question just because you saw a stat on it.

So lets simplify the question: The team that scores more points wins right? So why scoring 2 points is better than not letting the other team to score 2 points?

PS: You (and otherS) are always talking about how the board is too into advanced/and not really that advanced stats to evaluate a player/team and has a prejudice vs people that don't like them/use it. But in this case I believe you were equally prejudiced against what i said because i used a stat in it. Think about it. Its very hard to prove with facts a lot of things people are discussing in this board. So stats can help in that way. You say most of advanced stats has a lot of noise in them (its true) but a thing that is also true is that the world that we see, and what our brain processes also has a lot of noise in it. There are a lot of little things that can influence your views and opinions on some matters. We are emotional beings and most of the time we don't even notice how our emotions influence our decisions/opinions on variing subjects. So stats are used because It will help us lead with the noise to our perception and because if you want to protect your point of views with FACTS its not feasable to analise play by play of each game/ player in question on this forum.


BTW Aristoteles was a very smart guy. A lot smarter than me. But he said the earth was in the center of the universe. Just because he said it it doesn't mean that if I quote him i would be right no matter how smart or well intentioned he was.

[EastSideBucksFan]

And there are like 2 or 3 post up bigs in the league that kill Sanders

It is more than 2 or 3 (you guys can list them out) That's why the ZaZa has been so important for this team in that he gives them a bigger body and an outside jump shot.

But yes, he's a tremendous defender. No argument there.

Zaza flew back to Georgia due to the passing of his grandmother.

If we only have Sanders at C, things are going to get real bad.

Compared to last year when we had 5 centers.

Hope we can sign Michael Eric for tonight.

[sidney lanier]

Spoiler:

I still dont understand why people still undervalue good Defense. 50% of the game is played on that end, so It has the same impact as a good offensive player. Yes, its not as pretty. Its easier to find? On a good level yes, on an elite level not as much.

So please someone explain it to me: Why does a good defender that impacts 5Points per 100 possessions for example on that end is worse than one that impacts 5 PP100 on the Offensive end inf both have the same bad impact on the opposite end?

Because the only place in which offense and defense are considered equally important in professional basketball is in the minds of those who contrive what are non-ironically referred to as advanced stats.

If we lived in a world of hand checks, never touching the ball below the equator when dribbling, no 3-point line, no NBA step, and no restricted area—in other words, if the rules of the game were such that defensive and offensive skills were more equally valuable than they are now—then there might be room for discussing the possible equivalence of the importance of offensive and defensive skills. But we don't. We live in this world:



As for the apparent equivalent "impacts" you mention (5 points/100 possessions on either end, say), what you're looking at is statistical noise. These stats have so many dependent and confounding variables that the numbers thrown off by the simple algorithms of advanced statters are pretty meaningless, however symmetrical, elegantly contrived, and intellectually satisfying to those who don't understand how the mathematical discipline of statistics works.

I realize that these are fighting words in these parts, but I have Town Marshal M. Perical on my side. He says advanced stats are non-falsifiable in the Popperian sense and therefore operate in a world more aspirational than real. I agree with him.

You didn't understand I guess. I'm using the 5point/100 possessions not as the stat we can get right now (I agree it has a lot of noise influencing it, mostly in small and medium samples) but pretending we for some kind of magic could get a number the real number of that impact (yeah its a team game, and the way X player works with Y is different of the number he gets with Z even if Y and Z have exactly the same impact but lets ignore it for a little bit, its not related to the point i'm trying to make). I know you are very defensive about stats (wonder why) but i wasn't even using it or being pro / against them but you decided to attack my question just because you saw a stat on it.

So lets simplify the question: The team that scores more points wins right? So why scoring 2 points is better than not letting the other team to score 2 points?

PS: You (and otherS) are always talking about how the board is too into advanced/and not really that advanced stats to evaluate a player/team and has a prejudice vs people that don't like them/use it. But in this case I believe you were equally prejudiced against what i said because i used a stat in it. Think about it. Its very hard to prove with facts a lot of things people are discussing in this board. So stats can help in that way. You say most of advanced stats has a lot of noise in them (its true) but a thing that is also true is that the world that we see, and what our brain processes also has a lot of noise in it. There are a lot of little things that can influence your views and opinions on some matters. We are emotional beings and most of the time we don't even notice how our emotions influence our decisions/opinions on variing subjects. So stats are used because It will help us lead with the noise to our perception and because if you want to protect your point of views with FACTS its not feasable to analise play by play of each game/ player in question on this forum.


BTW Aristoteles was a very smart guy. A lot smarter than me. But he said the earth was in the center of the universe. Just because he said it it doesn't mean that if I quote him i would be right no matter how smart or well intentioned he was.

The reason ancient science is mockable by us today is that it sometimes wasn't scientific in the way we understand science. Aristotle believed in spontaneous generation because it made sense to him and he found it intellectually satisfying, not because it was a hypothesis he decided to prove or disprove by observation and experiment. Since the Scientific Revolution I think we all expect data to have been generated in a way that's testable and provable. When it isn't, it does kind of bug me, I admit. When it isn't and it's asserted to be valid, it bugs me even more.

But you're right. Your premise about the equivalent importance of O and D doesn't depend on the measures of these things being valid. However, it does depend on other assumptions: for example, it depends on the hypothesis that defensive prowess affects scoring (negatively, of course) as much as offensive prowess. If you're right in this, a good defender is just as effective at preventing two points as an equally good offensive player at scoring two.

Given the nature of the game and the way the rules have evolved, I just find that hard to accept. I'll take five Michael Jordans and you can have five Bruce Bowens and a 20-point head start, and I'll still beat you by 20.

[WeekapaugGroove]

Wow people getting deep in thought in this thread. I like it. I'll take a simple approach that with the hand checking rules and the layup or 3 approach offense has an advantage and is a little more important. But a rim protector like sanders has alot of value because he causes teams to shoot more shots away from the rim and those shots have less of a chance of going in.

Sent from my SM-G900V using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Bucks_MacGyver]

I want to see what JOB can do

[PedroGrande]

But you're right. Your premise about the equivalent importance of O and D doesn't depend on the measures of these things being valid. However, it does depend on other assumptions: for example, it depends on the hypothesis that defensive prowess affects scoring (negatively, of course) as much as offensive prowess. If you're right in this, a good defender is just as effective at preventing two points as an equally good offensive player at scoring two.

Given the nature of the game and the way the rules have evolved, I just find that hard to accept. I'll take five Michael Jordans and you can have five Bruce Bowens and a 20-point head start, and I'll still beat you by 20.

I know what you're trying to say and I can say that i'm somewhat conviced about it. But if you think about it the real value of something is the difference its impact has comparing to the rest of the field.

So the question can change to the price of something. I want to be have the fastest lap on a track that only has 4 corners and most of it is are straights. So the most important thing is the speed we can reach right? If the motor for a car ever costs 1 Million dollars and it goes 300MPH. But I can have one that goes 290MPH that only costs 200k $. And I can use the rest of the money to improve the handling to be better on the corners and in the end be faster than the car that has the best motor because of how so much better the slowest car can be on the corners. This is a case were we all agree that speed is the most important thing but in the end elite Speed costs much more than the diference it can make comparing to what we can achieve by not getting elite Speed on straights but be better on corners.

Spoiler:

I could be a jerk and say that offense automatically fails because it doesn't score in more than 50% of the possessions on a game vs a good defense. But that's not the point and i don't want to prove i'm right, i want that other people convince me if i'm right or wrong with arguments i can relate too.

So Bowen didn't have the same cost as Jordan so we cant use that assumption (and Jordan was pretty good on D also). But if you said to me that Jordan would defend like Harden on that clip we saw on the ATL i don't know If I wouldn't put a bet on Bowen

[AussieBuck]

You think Sanders causes imbalance, but also think Knight is a major asset to our currently ranked 27th offense? Here is the reason Sanders is highly regarded by fans and every basketball analyst that is knowledgeable; he majorly impacts defense in dozens of advanced analytics and our defense is actually good. All the positive things said about Knight haven't shown up with anything measurable on the end of the floor he is supposed to impact. In fact, the advanced stats for Knight are still ugly for the most part outside of the improvement in his individual efficiency. It's just unfortunate that you choose to ignore or tout the advanced stats for a player based on whether you personally like them or not.

I guess my primary point is that moving forward Sanders is clearly ahead of Knight on the "keeper" pecking order.

my motivation is about upside. knight has a load of it and sanders has none. its about improvement. knight is showing consistent improvement and sanders has had one really good year out of five.

if I felt sanders defense influenced games against teams with an inside presence the way he does against the teams that are weak inside it would be a different story. but bottom line is if pek plays the other night were a significantly better team offensively AND comparatively the same defensively if zaza is taking the court. sanders is a niche string bean defender who completely sucks on offense. hes a part time player on this team today..... and hell be a part time player in the future. people need to look beyond his rapm and grasp this simple concept.

What's your timeline for Knight to become a positive impact player on one end of the court at least? I'll let you pick which side.