Andre Drummond's Weight

[Blkbrd671]

I like Drummond like anyone else but there’s no chance that he will ever reach the heights of Davis. Never ever ever.

I don't think there comparable . Anthony Davis looks to be a pf that can play center and sf where as fee is a center. Davis is leaps and bounds better right now, but I still think dre will be in the same discussion as one of best players in league eventually .



Detroit vs Everybody

[hoophabit]

Production and minutes are not correlated. A players most productive games are not always his biggest minute games, and a players biggest minute games are not always his most productive. They are not mutually exclusive.

I'm a math guy, so I've stayed out of this because frankly, it isn't interesting.

But... I'm interested enough now. I dig your posts and your name, Todd (because it's my name, too), but you're wrong here. W-R-O-N-G. Perhaps you just aren't used to using the word correlation, and I can totally understand that, because it's a crazy word.

Production and minutes are HIGHLY correlated, especially for a guy like Drummond. In fact, the relationship is CAUSAL (correlation doesn't imply causation, but causation always has some degree of correlation), because If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that. If he's out there committing stupid fouls, not showing full effort, or taking stupid shots, he gets pulled. The kid was 21 last season, he needed to be coached up all the time.

Harden may have played his 36-38 minutes regardless, because without him, Houston had no offense. Drummond wasn't like that, at least not in the past, because we had Monroe to play center if Dre sucked. Now we don't, so I do expect him to play more this year, but... that doesn't change the past. Looking at his high minute games is going to make him look better than he is, because those games are, for the most part, his better games by default.

As George would say; "Thank You!"

[Todd3]

Production and minutes are not correlated. A players most productive games are not always his biggest minute games, and a players biggest minute games are not always his most productive. They are not mutually exclusive.

I'm a math guy, so I've stayed out of this because frankly, it isn't interesting.

But... I'm interested enough now. I dig your posts and your name, Todd (because it's my name, too), but you're wrong here. W-R-O-N-G. Perhaps you just aren't used to using the word correlation, and I can totally understand that, because it's a crazy word.

Production and minutes are HIGHLY correlated, especially for a guy like Drummond. In fact, the relationship is CAUSAL (correlation doesn't imply causation, but causation always has some degree of correlation), because If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that. If he's out there committing stupid fouls, not showing full effort, or taking stupid shots, he gets pulled. The kid was 21 last season, he needed to be coached up all the time.

Harden may have played his 36-38 minutes regardless, because without him, Houston had no offense. Drummond wasn't like that, at least not in the past, because we had Monroe to play center if Dre sucked. Now we don't, so I do expect him to play more this year, but... that doesn't change the past. Looking at his high minute games is going to make him look better than he is, because those games are, for the most part, his better games by default.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

For someone who claims to be a math guy, your complete dismissal of facts in favor of fantasy makes that hard to believe.

There are actual games showing the exact opposite of what you are claiming.

vs POR 13-14
43:27 min, 13p, 14r, 5 fouls, 6-15 FG, 1-5 FT

vs CHI 14-15
36:27 min, 2p, 12r, 6 fouls, 0-5 FG, 2-4 FT

vs BOS 14-15
27:16 min, 22p, 14r, 4 fouls, 11-19 FG 0-3 FT

vs BKN 14-15
27:50 min 18p, 20r, 4 fouls, 7-15 FG 4-8 FT

Drummonds minutes were NOT only based on how he was playing. His minutes were also affected by Smith and Monroe needing minutes too regardless of how he was playing many nights, among other things.

Are you really going to pretend there werent games where Drummond was dominating and then barely played the rest of the game, only to watch Smith and Monroe stink it up instead?

If you want to live in that fantasy, then you may have a point... but if you want to live in reality, then no you CANNOT just conclude If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that.... because it was not as simple as that. There were other factors in play.

You also have to factor in the times none of the three were playing well, but Drummond was the least crappy at the time so he got more minutes by default, even though he wasnt actually playing well.

Saying what he does next year wont change the past is funny given the whole premise of your post is revisionist history.

[Todd3]

I like Drummond like anyone else but there’s no chance that he will ever reach the heights of Davis. Never ever ever.

Sorry but you will have to explain what Anthony Davis has done that makes him unreachable to the mere mortal Andre Drummond.

I get the skepticism with regards to Shaq, the most dominant big man of all time, but Anthony Davis has done nothing to warrant that level of respect at this point in time to be talking about any player never being as good as him.

[Todd3]

There is nothing biased or skewed here. Those are his actual numbers when given that many minutes. If you want to question whether the small sample size could translate to a whole season, or if he could actually get that many minutes consistently, those are valid questions. I personally dont see him ever getting 40 mpg, not because he isnt good enough, but because it would wear him out and shorten his career. 38 mpg is probably his max. But you cant say he didnt post those numbers when given 40 mpg, and that being the only sample we have of him playing that many minutes, I am not sure what you are basing your argument on that he cant avg that if given those minutes consistently.

So I will ask you, if Drummond got 40 mpg, what would he avg, and what are you basing your projection on?

We are basing ours on his actual numbers when getting that many minutes. If yours is just based on a hunch because you doubt his ability, then maybe you need to rethink who has the bias here.

Suggesting Drummond only got that many minutes because he played well those nights is skewed to fit your argument. As if he didnt play well almost every night avg 14 & 14 in only 31 mpg. As if his minutes werent limited because he had to share his position with Monroe... rather because he just wasnt good enough to play more than that, right?

It seems to me everything we have presented has been based on facts and everything you have presenting has been biased or skewed.

As a sharpening of wits, controversy is often, indeed, of mutual advantage, in order to correct one’s thoughts and awaken new views. But in learning and in mental power both disputants must be tolerably equal. If one of them lacks learning, he will fail to understand the other, as he is not on the same level with his antagonist. If he lacks mental power, he will be embittered, and led into dishonest tricks, and end by being rude.

The only safe rule, therefore, is that which Aristotle mentions in the last chapter of his Topica: not to dispute with the first person you meet, but only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to cherish truth, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong, should truth lie with him. From this it follows that scarcely one man in a hundred is worth your disputing with him. You may let the remainder say what they please, for every one is at liberty to be a fool — desipere est jus gentium. Remember what Voltaire says: La paix vaut encore mieux que la vérité. Remember also an Arabian proverb which tells us that on the tree of silence there hangs its fruit, which is peace.

Schopenhauer

Bravo sir. That is, without question, the most eloquent way of calling someone an ignorant pig and walking away, I have ever read on a message board. I of course don't agree as his argument is also mine, but I also can appreciate a well written, and fantastic reply.

He didnt write that lol

I appreciate his ability to know when he is wrong and bow out gracefully though.

[tmorgan]

Production and minutes are not correlated. A players most productive games are not always his biggest minute games, and a players biggest minute games are not always his most productive. They are not mutually exclusive.

I'm a math guy, so I've stayed out of this because frankly, it isn't interesting.

But... I'm interested enough now. I dig your posts and your name, Todd (because it's my name, too), but you're wrong here. W-R-O-N-G. Perhaps you just aren't used to using the word correlation, and I can totally understand that, because it's a crazy word.

Production and minutes are HIGHLY correlated, especially for a guy like Drummond. In fact, the relationship is CAUSAL (correlation doesn't imply causation, but causation always has some degree of correlation), because If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that. If he's out there committing stupid fouls, not showing full effort, or taking stupid shots, he gets pulled. The kid was 21 last season, he needed to be coached up all the time.

Harden may have played his 36-38 minutes regardless, because without him, Houston had no offense. Drummond wasn't like that, at least not in the past, because we had Monroe to play center if Dre sucked. Now we don't, so I do expect him to play more this year, but... that doesn't change the past. Looking at his high minute games is going to make him look better than he is, because those games are, for the most part, his better games by default.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

For someone who claims to be a math guy, your complete dismissal of facts in favor of fantasy makes that hard to believe.

There are actual games showing the exact opposite of what you are claiming.

vs POR 13-14
43:27 min, 13p, 14r, 5 fouls, 6-15 FG, 1-5 FT

vs CHI 14-15
36:27 min, 2p, 12r, 6 fouls, 0-5 FG, 2-4 FT

vs BOS 14-15
27:16 min, 22p, 14r, 4 fouls, 11-19 FG 0-3 FT

vs BKN 14-15
27:50 min 18p, 20r, 4 fouls, 7-15 FG 4-8 FT

Drummonds minutes were NOT only based on how he was playing. His minutes were also affected by Smith and Monroe needing minutes too regardless of how he was playing many nights, among other things.

Are you really going to pretend there werent games where Drummond was dominating and then barely played the rest of the game, only to watch Smith and Monroe stink it up instead?

If you want to live in that fantasy, then you may have a point... but if you want to live in reality, then no you CANNOT just conclude If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that.... because it was not as simple as that. There were other factors in play.

You also have to factor in the times none of the three were playing well, but Drummond was the least crappy at the time so he got more minutes by default, even though he wasnt actually playing well.

Saying what he does next year wont change the past is funny given the whole premise of your post is revisionist history.

Sorry, but anecdotal evidence isn't relevant here.

Were there games Drummond played a lot despite not playing well? Of course there were, and I never argued otherwise. Were there games he played less than he should have, despite playing well? Probably a couple (ever hear of foul trouble, Todd?), although he generally earned more time with good performance. I wish you could just ask SVG directly, I'm sure he'd tell you.

We're talking trends here, Todd, not data points. Also, I never said Drummond's minutes were based ONLY on how he was playing. That's not what correlation is. It's a factor -- a big factor -- but not the only factor, which is perfectly consistent with the term "correlation".

You seem to like to argue in anecdotes and extremes, and that's not a game I'm going to play.

[MrBigShot]

I like Drummond like anyone else but there’s no chance that he will ever reach the heights of Davis. Never ever ever.

Sorry but you will have to explain what Anthony Davis has done that makes him unreachable to the mere mortal Andre Drummond.

I get the skepticism with regards to Shaq, the most dominant big man of all time, but Anthony Davis has done nothing to warrant that level of respect at this point in time to be talking about any player never being as good as him.

You mean other than dropping 32/11/3 on a 61 TS% against the team that won the championship this year in the playoffs right? I've said it before and I'll say it again: people on this board underestimate how special Anthony Davis is.

Drummond will never be as good as Anthony Davis. Now, or in their primes. Don't look at the stats, just go watch him play. His athleticism, his insane activity level which is more like that of a hustling big man off the bench than a superstar, his smooth jumper, his ability to pick up moves and apply them to his offensive game so quickly. He's got a level of basketball IQ/feel for the game that Andre doesn't.

Anyone can quote me on that, put it in a signature, whatever. Time will prove it to be true. It may not be popular opinion around here but it's reality. Set Drummond up for those kind of expectations and you will be disappointed...if Dre had just finished his rookie year this season dropping 16/15 the last few months of the season and flashing a post game like he did maybe it would be a different story. But he didn't, he's going to his 4th year.

[DBC10]

I like Drummond like anyone else but there’s no chance that he will ever reach the heights of Davis. Never ever ever.

Sorry but you will have to explain what Anthony Davis has done that makes him unreachable to the mere mortal Andre Drummond.

I get the skepticism with regards to Shaq, the most dominant big man of all time, but Anthony Davis has done nothing to warrant that level of respect at this point in time to be talking about any player never being as good as him.

You mean other than dropping 32/11/3 on a 61 TS% against the team that won the championship this year in the playoffs right? I've said it before and I'll say it again: people on this board underestimate how special Anthony Davis is.

Drummond will never be as good as Anthony Davis. Now, or in their primes. Don't look at the stats, just go watch him play. His athleticism, his insane activity level which is more like that of a hustling big man off the bench than a superstar, his smooth jumper, his ability to pick up moves and apply them to his offensive game so quickly. He's got a level of basketball IQ/feel for the game that Andre doesn't.

Anyone can quote me on that, put it in a signature, whatever. Time will prove it to be true. It may not be popular opinion around here but it's reality. Set Drummond up for those kind of expectations and you will be disappointed...if Dre had just finished his rookie year this season dropping 16/15 the last few months of the season and flashing a post game like he did maybe it would be a different story. But he didn't, he's going to his 4th year.

Don't forget, Anthony Davis also is developing a 3 point shot too. So he's going to be one of the most complete PF/Cs in this league and is poised to take over after Lebron. Quote me on that.

He also dragged his team to the playoffs despite injuries to his team and to himself as well. His dagger against OKC singlehandedly landed the Pellies to their playoff berth in years.

[Scout Taron]

I'm a math guy, so I've stayed out of this because frankly, it isn't interesting.

But... I'm interested enough now. I dig your posts and your name, Todd (because it's my name, too), but you're wrong here. W-R-O-N-G. Perhaps you just aren't used to using the word correlation, and I can totally understand that, because it's a crazy word.

Production and minutes are HIGHLY correlated, especially for a guy like Drummond. In fact, the relationship is CAUSAL (correlation doesn't imply causation, but causation always has some degree of correlation), because If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that. If he's out there committing stupid fouls, not showing full effort, or taking stupid shots, he gets pulled. The kid was 21 last season, he needed to be coached up all the time.

Harden may have played his 36-38 minutes regardless, because without him, Houston had no offense. Drummond wasn't like that, at least not in the past, because we had Monroe to play center if Dre sucked. Now we don't, so I do expect him to play more this year, but... that doesn't change the past. Looking at his high minute games is going to make him look better than he is, because those games are, for the most part, his better games by default.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

For someone who claims to be a math guy, your complete dismissal of facts in favor of fantasy makes that hard to believe.

There are actual games showing the exact opposite of what you are claiming.

vs POR 13-14
43:27 min, 13p, 14r, 5 fouls, 6-15 FG, 1-5 FT

vs CHI 14-15
36:27 min, 2p, 12r, 6 fouls, 0-5 FG, 2-4 FT

vs BOS 14-15
27:16 min, 22p, 14r, 4 fouls, 11-19 FG 0-3 FT

vs BKN 14-15
27:50 min 18p, 20r, 4 fouls, 7-15 FG 4-8 FT

Drummonds minutes were NOT only based on how he was playing. His minutes were also affected by Smith and Monroe needing minutes too regardless of how he was playing many nights, among other things.

Are you really going to pretend there werent games where Drummond was dominating and then barely played the rest of the game, only to watch Smith and Monroe stink it up instead?

If you want to live in that fantasy, then you may have a point... but if you want to live in reality, then no you CANNOT just conclude If he's playing well, SVG plays him more. It's really as simple as that.... because it was not as simple as that. There were other factors in play.

You also have to factor in the times none of the three were playing well, but Drummond was the least crappy at the time so he got more minutes by default, even though he wasnt actually playing well.

Saying what he does next year wont change the past is funny given the whole premise of your post is revisionist history.

Sorry, but anecdotal evidence isn't relevant here.

Were there games Drummond played a lot despite not playing well? Of course there were, and I never argued otherwise. Were there games he played less than he should have, despite playing well? Probably a couple (ever hear of foul trouble, Todd?), although he generally earned more time with good performance. I wish you could just ask SVG directly, I'm sure he'd tell you.

We're talking trends here, Todd, not data points. Also, I never said Drummond's minutes were based ONLY on how he was playing. That's not what correlation is. It's a factor -- a big factor -- but not the only factor, which is perfectly consistent with the term "correlation".

You seem to like to argue in anecdotes and extremes, and that's not a game I'm going to play.

I mean, I'd assume that there was a sizable correlation between Drummond's offensive play and his minuted played... But as I calculated just on the other page, the correlation was pretty weak.

[Rendei]

Interesting debate you guys have going on in here. I just want to add that only two of the 40+ minute games that Drummond had this past season ended in regulation. The rest were a result of overtime(s).

So while I typically agree that more minutes come with production. In this particular case, they also came as a result of the score simply being tied at the end. So it's not TOTALLY out of bounds to analyze those games, but the sample size is still too small to matter.

[tmorgan]

I mean, I'd assume that there was a sizable correlation between Drummond's offensive play and his minuted played... But as I calculated just on the other page, the correlation was pretty weak.

The data you posted showed a strong positive correlation between minutes and total points and minutes and total rebounds. Of course, that's fairly obvious, because more minutes on the floor is more time to put up stats.

You also included (unless I'm misreading the data you presented) a weak but positive relationship between minutes played and points per minute, as well as minutes played and rebounds per minute. Weak or not, that means he was more productive per minute when he played more minutes, which is exactly what I was saying. Actually, it's even more impressive, really, because more minutes in a game leads to greater fatigue in the game, and yet Drummond still put up somewhat better per minute numbers when he played more minutes.

In a overall sense (not for every game, Todd3), he played more minutes when he played better. This data certainly doesn't prove that his better play was the cause of his additional minutes, but I submit that that's pretty much common sense for a younger player playing on a team with a viable alternative at center if Drummond is screwing up. Now that that's no longer the case (no disrespect to Baynes, but Monroe is clearly a better player), he could very well get his 34 minutes a game regardless, which means we need him to step up his consistency, because we need "good Andre" to win most nights.