OhayoKD wrote:SNPA wrote:OhayoKD wrote:Do not explain what you don't understand
passer-rating was explicitly created "to compliment box-creation", estimate when players find open men and don't, and differentiate between "elite" passes, "good" passes, "missed elite" passed, and "missed good" passes and then ben postes "expected value" chart that mentions "layup assists" specifically on the basis that layups generate higher quality looks.
You have ducked analysis of the actual inputs beyond height because those inputs are very clearly tied to "creation".
Assist/load only underrates Bird if and only if Bird being off-ball --doesn't-- affect the quality of what he creates.
It only underrates Bird if assists do not reflect what Bird offers
And cruically, if ball-handling is important for creative efficiency, then the metric not being able to account for what Bird is doing pre-pass may potentially overrate him. I have made the case that what Bird generates is hampered by his limited ball-handling. And instead of addressing that, you have decided to appeal to a conclusion as justification...for that very same conclusion(this is called circular reasoning).
If you or Ben have film-tracking showing that Bird is generating higher quality looks than Kobe, is doing more to break a defense before an assist than Kobe, or is missing less opportunities a stronger ball-handler might have found or generated by pressuring the defense with their driving game/slashing, then we may have a decent starting point for "passer-rating underrates the gap", otherwise, you are wasting my and your time.
I do not care about what you think you are independently knowledgeable about and you've very blatantly misrepresented the stat you are assuming underrates Bird. Bias does not just go the direction you want it to because it would support your priors. You have done nothing to argue that adjusted passer-rating, box-creation, raw assists, ast percentage, or any of the box-stuff underrates Bird as a creator. You have just insisted they do. Passing skill=/passing value. And Ben's metrics do not seem to think Bird's passing value matched-up with his skill. That does not make them biased. That is a claim you actually have to justify. And that requires talking basketball, which thus far you have been almost completely unwilling to do.
Most of this I can’t address. It’s noise to me, if others can appreciate it I’m happy for them.
The part I’ve highlighted is telling to me though. What Bird creates is not hampered by ball handling skill, not needing the ball to be great is better than needing the ball to be great. It’s closer to a superpower than a hindrance. It leaves the other four guys full room to flourish, it’s a game of 5x5.
Nope.bird
1984 +3.3 (RS) +6.4 (PS)
1985 +4.9 (RS) +3.9 (PS)
1986 +4.6 (RS) + 8.3 (PS)
1987 +5.2 (RS) + 8.7 (PS)
1988 +7.4 (RS) +4.2 (PS)
average +5.1(RS) +6.3(PS)
combined average: +5.7
magic
1986 +6.1(RS) +6.7
1987 +7.6 (RS) +10.7
1988 +5.1(RS) +8.3
1989 +6 (RS) +9.3
1990 +5.9(RS) +8.4
Average +6.1(RS), + 8.7 (PS)
combined average: +7.4
Being good at ball-handling is good! Needing teammates who are good at ball-handling is bad!
Mr. Natural talent was pretty mid at a very important basketball skill which nuetered his ability to translate that "natural talent" into value. That's why he wasn't as good!
I consider this trolling. It’s certainly not a serious basketball take.
