48 minutes are the perfect example of a stat that has value, but can be used inappropriately. The stat isn't inherently bad, but there are bad uses of it.
If one guy plays 15 minutes, and another guy plays 25 minutes, and the guy playing 15 minutes has a higher PER48, you can say that he was more effective in the time he was on the court than the guy who played 25 minutes. What you can't do is guarantee that that PER48 would carry over into increased playing time.
This Is Why Willie Green Will Be Traded
Moderators: BullyKing, HartfordWhalers, sixers hoops, Foshan, Sixerscan
-
dbodner
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 13,474
- And1: 536
- Joined: Feb 18, 2002
- Location: Philadelphia
- Contact:
twitter.com/DerekBodnerNBA :: Senior writer, The Athletic Philadelphia
-
bebopdeluxe
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,996
- And1: 4,008
- Joined: Jun 27, 2002
- Location: philly
Sixerscan:
Sorry, bro...I did not say that Willie G. was a good rebounder.
And - to wade into the current mood of this thread - I think that stats do provide information that help in the assessment of a player. For me, a PG's ast/to ratio is very important, and I find it difficult to argue otherwise. However, there are aspects of the development of a player's game that statistics have a difficult time grasping. For example, right now I think that Thad is getting more visibility and ink that his stats warrant, at least in part because of the things that he does on the floor that do not show up in a stat line. Same thing at times with Evans...a stat line cannot accurately capture Evans' ability to get under the skin of an opposing player...gettting him out of his comfort zone...things like that.
One thing that I would say about Willie's game that may not necessarily show up in the stat line, but I believe through my observation of his game this season, is his passing. While averaging 2 assists a game might not seem like a lot, in watching Willie's game this season, it does seem like there is less "black hole" than in prior years. There may be many variables that come into play here (which I'm not going to necessarily spell out unless somebody really wants me to), but the bottom line is that, IMO, Willie is passing the ball better and more often this season than in prior years...and that opinion is formed as much (if not more) by watching his game as it is by looking at the stats.
Sorry, bro...I did not say that Willie G. was a good rebounder.
And - to wade into the current mood of this thread - I think that stats do provide information that help in the assessment of a player. For me, a PG's ast/to ratio is very important, and I find it difficult to argue otherwise. However, there are aspects of the development of a player's game that statistics have a difficult time grasping. For example, right now I think that Thad is getting more visibility and ink that his stats warrant, at least in part because of the things that he does on the floor that do not show up in a stat line. Same thing at times with Evans...a stat line cannot accurately capture Evans' ability to get under the skin of an opposing player...gettting him out of his comfort zone...things like that.
One thing that I would say about Willie's game that may not necessarily show up in the stat line, but I believe through my observation of his game this season, is his passing. While averaging 2 assists a game might not seem like a lot, in watching Willie's game this season, it does seem like there is less "black hole" than in prior years. There may be many variables that come into play here (which I'm not going to necessarily spell out unless somebody really wants me to), but the bottom line is that, IMO, Willie is passing the ball better and more often this season than in prior years...and that opinion is formed as much (if not more) by watching his game as it is by looking at the stats.
-
Louis Williams
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 908
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jul 10, 2005
As for why it bothers me even though we're winning. First of all, I enjoy discussion and debate. More importantly, my goal is to win a championship. The fact that we're winning doesn't mean I'm going to ignore the flaws on the team.
But we all know the team is flawed! This is not a championship team!
This team is one year removed from trading a Hall of Famer. What team has traded their franchise player and became a contender the next season?
This team is still rebuilding. They were picked to finish dead last in the conference. They are playing playoff basketball, and are one of the hottest teams in the league. I don't care if Gary Coleman was starting at the 2 as long the team is winning.
This is what is frustrating to me. I would think that all Sixers fans would be just as happy. But when I see people bitching about Cheeks or Green or Sam or Evans or whoever, I'm very disappointed. Considering how this season was supposed to turnout, I don't know what anyone would have to complain about.
This team has young talent, cap space flexibility, and a good coach. They are unselfish, and they defend. They have an emerging star, a solid veteran PG, and a shot blocking center. The foundation is there. They are headed in the right direction. There is so much to like. To bitch about Green when everything else is going so well? It doesn't make sense at all.
-
dbodner
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 13,474
- And1: 536
- Joined: Feb 18, 2002
- Location: Philadelphia
- Contact:
This team has young talent, cap space flexibility, and a good coach. They are unselfish, and they defend. They have an emerging star, a solid veteran PG, and a shot blocking center. The foundation is there. They are headed in the right direction. There is so much to like. To bitch about Green when everything else is going so well? It doesn't make sense at all.
Sure it does. We talk about a LOT of things here. I talk about Thad. I talk about Iguodala, I talk about Mo. And I talk about Willie Green. If you look through my posts, it's not like a majority of posts are about willie green. But when the topic comes up, I'll give my opinion, and not just stick my head in the sand, pretend I like him starting, and say everything's happy and "peaches and cream"
twitter.com/DerekBodnerNBA :: Senior writer, The Athletic Philadelphia
-
Sixers24
- Freshman
- Posts: 74
- And1: 0
- Joined: Feb 20, 2008
Louis Williams wrote:As for why it bothers me even though we're winning. First of all, I enjoy discussion and debate. More importantly, my goal is to win a championship. The fact that we're winning doesn't mean I'm going to ignore the flaws on the team.
But we all know the team is flawed! This is not a championship team!
This team is one year removed from trading a Hall of Famer. What team has traded their franchise player and became a contender the next season?
This team is still rebuilding. They were picked to finish dead last in the conference. They are playing playoff basketball, and are one of the hottest teams in the league. I don't care if Gary Coleman was starting at the 2 as long the team is winning.
This is what is frustrating to me. I would think that all Sixers fans would be just as happy. But when I see people bitching about Cheeks or Green or Sam or Evans or whoever, I'm very disappointed. Considering how this season was supposed to turnout, I don't know what anyone would have to complain about.
This team has young talent, cap space flexibility, and a good coach. They are unselfish, and they defend. They have an emerging star, a solid veteran PG, and a shot blocking center. The foundation is there. They are headed in the right direction. There is so much to like. To bitch about Green when everything else is going so well? It doesn't make sense at all.
Complacency breeds mediocrity.
You can never, ever, ever be 100% satisfied with your roster or how the team is doing. People talk about Willie Green because they recognize it's a position that can be upgraded. We recognize that an upgraded position means an upgrade in the standings. And if I as a fan ever don't want that? Well, then it's probably time to find a new hobby.
-
ChuckS
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,547
- And1: 323
- Joined: Aug 27, 2005
[quote] "I'm convinced that half the people on this board (in this country?) have never taken a statistics course in their life and have no idea how they are created and used as a tool of analysis. It's unbelievable."
That is quite possible, and the reason someone like you could be an invaluable asset to the board.
Keep in mind, however, that some, with whom you may disagree, have a background in mathematics which causes them to question aspects of widely held tenets, and are perhaps just more cynical and cautious how they use them in analysis. They may be wrongly perceived as implying that one system has no redeeming value, merely because they prefer another.
I think everyone, if sometimes subconsciously, uses numbers. The problem, as I see it, is not a misunderstanding of their importance in analysis, but their use as the sole, or even primary, basis for a determination...ignoring the omnipresent caveats.
But I could be wrong.
That is quite possible, and the reason someone like you could be an invaluable asset to the board.
Keep in mind, however, that some, with whom you may disagree, have a background in mathematics which causes them to question aspects of widely held tenets, and are perhaps just more cynical and cautious how they use them in analysis. They may be wrongly perceived as implying that one system has no redeeming value, merely because they prefer another.
I think everyone, if sometimes subconsciously, uses numbers. The problem, as I see it, is not a misunderstanding of their importance in analysis, but their use as the sole, or even primary, basis for a determination...ignoring the omnipresent caveats.
But I could be wrong.
-
Sixers24
- Freshman
- Posts: 74
- And1: 0
- Joined: Feb 20, 2008
ChuckS wrote:"I'm convinced that half the people on this board (in this country?) have never taken a statistics course in their life and have no idea how they are created and used as a tool of analysis. It's unbelievable."
That is quite possible, and the reason someone like you could be an invaluable asset to the board.
Keep in mind, however, that some, with whom you may disagree, have a background in mathematics which causes them to question aspects of widely held tenets, and are perhaps just more cynical and cautious how they use them in analysis. They may be wrongly perceived as implying that one system has no redeeming value, merely because they prefer another.
I think everyone, if sometimes subconsciously, uses numbers. The problem, as I see it, is not a misunderstanding of their importance in analysis, but their use as the sole, or even primary, basis for a determination...ignoring the omnipresent caveats.
But I could be wrong.
People like you (and I assume you're talking about yourself) are much less prevalent than the people who simply don't get it. I think people who understand statistics and their usage inherently challenge them and recognize their inadequacies.
-
carlos1223
- Banned User
- Posts: 847
- And1: 0
- Joined: Feb 23, 2008
-
tk76
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 9,615
- And1: 734
- Joined: Jul 21, 2006
Willie would be fine if he didn't shoot 20 fts jumpers- and stopped shooting threes after he misses his first 2.
Sounds easy enough- but after 2 months of following that aproach he has fallen off the wagon- big time.
Now it seems like Carney has recaptures they same bug. I think these guys are pressing, and are trying to do to much- harming the team.
Sounds easy enough- but after 2 months of following that aproach he has fallen off the wagon- big time.
Now it seems like Carney has recaptures they same bug. I think these guys are pressing, and are trying to do to much- harming the team.