Records as a starter:
McInnis 38% (8-13)
Wallace 38% (18-29)
Felton 37% (18-31)
Richardson 35% (18-34)
Okafor 35% (18-34)
Mohammed 20% (2-8 )*
Hollins 0% (0-1)
Carroll 0% (0-2)
Dudley: 0% (0-8 )
*not sure if all Mohammed's starts have come with us or if some were with Detroit, but I know he's only lost lately as a starter, and he had a worse record than McInnis as a starter back when I figured it out, so I don't believe he surpasses McInnis either
The McInnis Effect 2.0
Moderators: BigSlam, yosemiteben, fatlever, JDR720, Diop
The McInnis Effect 2.0
-
W_HAMILTON
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,453
- And1: 16,996
- Joined: Jun 13, 2004
-
-
Rich4114
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,319
- And1: 4,673
- Joined: Mar 11, 2004
- Location: PA
-
I'm not sure what this is supposed to tell us, but all I know is when I'm watching games and we've finally got some momentum, Vincent will sub someone for Mcinnis and he comes in, slows down our momentum, makes mistakes, and helps us lose.
Right now we suck and we'll never be a playoff team when our head coach is burning all of his timeouts with over 2 mins left on the clock in the 4th. We'll also have trouble as long as he keeps creating mis-matches in our opponents favor every game.
Mcinnis sucks and Boykins sucks, and neither should ever see the floor at the same time... ever.
Just get me a good backup PG in the off-season and use them as a backup PG. That or trade Felton for another PG and pickup a backup PG and use them properly so we can end this misery.
Right now we suck and we'll never be a playoff team when our head coach is burning all of his timeouts with over 2 mins left on the clock in the 4th. We'll also have trouble as long as he keeps creating mis-matches in our opponents favor every game.
Mcinnis sucks and Boykins sucks, and neither should ever see the floor at the same time... ever.
Just get me a good backup PG in the off-season and use them as a backup PG. That or trade Felton for another PG and pickup a backup PG and use them properly so we can end this misery.
Re: The McInnis Effect 2.0
-
fluffernutter
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,690
- And1: 52
- Joined: Oct 10, 2007
- Location: Here
Re: The McInnis Effect 2.0
W_HAMILTON wrote:Records as a starter:
McInnis 38% (8-13)
Wallace 38% (18-29)
Felton 37% (18-31)
Richardson 35% (18-34)
Okafor 35% (18-34)
Mohammed 20% (2-8 )*
Hollins 0% (0-1)
Carroll 0% (0-2)
Dudley: 0% (0-8 )
*not sure if all Mohammed's starts have come with us or if some were with Detroit, but I know he's only lost lately as a starter, and he had a worse record than McInnis as a starter back when I figured it out, so I don't believe he surpasses McInnis either
I'm not sure what you are trying to say either. In the games in which McInnis started (and we won) the rest of the team played well enough to make up for McInnis' point-sink presence in the lineup.
When he starts and we lose, the rest of the team isn't able to overcome as easily his point-sink abilities.
It's just asking a lot from the rest of the team.
It's like we are playing 4.5 vs. 5.5
Re: The McInnis Effect 2.0
-
W_HAMILTON
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,453
- And1: 16,996
- Joined: Jun 13, 2004
-
Re: The McInnis Effect 2.0
fluffernutter wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I'm not sure what you are trying to say either.
To quote you, "pretty easy to spot."
If the rest of the team plays "better" when McInnis is in the starting lineup, which results in us winning...that's all that matters.
Would you rather win the championship with Gheorge Muresan, or lose with, uh, Lebron James?
It's about winning, and for most of this season, McInnis has had the best record as a starter.
Something must be going right when he's our starting PG, or else we wouldn't be able to say that.
Re: The McInnis Effect 2.0
-
fluffernutter
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,690
- And1: 52
- Joined: Oct 10, 2007
- Location: Here
Re: The McInnis Effect 2.0
[quote="W_HAMILTON"][/quote]
This is the silliest thing I've ever read. C'mon man. You can do better than this!
You can do a LOT BETTER than this!
You could start a brown bat, play him a minute, and substitute him out as soon as possible.
The brown bat might end up with a 50% "starting" winning percentage - based solely on the rest of the game, when the bat was not involved.
Can you read +- statistics?
"If the rest of the team plays "better" when McInnis is in the starting lineup, which results in us winning...that's all that matters."
The rest of the team does not play better when he's in the starting lineup. Just read the numbers. We lose points when he is on the floor. We lose points when he starts. We lose points. Got it?
We might win when he starts, but that's in spite of him starting.
Nobody plays better when he's on the floor. How do I know? We lose points.
You are terribly confused about cause and effect.
This is the silliest thing I've ever read. C'mon man. You can do better than this!
You can do a LOT BETTER than this!
You could start a brown bat, play him a minute, and substitute him out as soon as possible.
The brown bat might end up with a 50% "starting" winning percentage - based solely on the rest of the game, when the bat was not involved.
Can you read +- statistics?
"If the rest of the team plays "better" when McInnis is in the starting lineup, which results in us winning...that's all that matters."
The rest of the team does not play better when he's in the starting lineup. Just read the numbers. We lose points when he is on the floor. We lose points when he starts. We lose points. Got it?
We might win when he starts, but that's in spite of him starting.
Nobody plays better when he's on the floor. How do I know? We lose points.
You are terribly confused about cause and effect.
-
W_HAMILTON
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,453
- And1: 16,996
- Joined: Jun 13, 2004
-
He sucks, but we win.
Sorry.
Maybe him sucking and taking the starting PG position motivates Felton to play better, which in turn helps the team? I think someone said that statistically Felton has had a history of playing better at SG than at PG...
Maybe since he sucks, he passes more than he shoots, which in turns gets guys motivated because they are receiving the ball and being included in the offense?
Maybe he signed that contract with the devil?
Who knows.
But we win with him in the starting lineup.
Period.
Sorry.
Maybe him sucking and taking the starting PG position motivates Felton to play better, which in turn helps the team? I think someone said that statistically Felton has had a history of playing better at SG than at PG...
Maybe since he sucks, he passes more than he shoots, which in turns gets guys motivated because they are receiving the ball and being included in the offense?
Maybe he signed that contract with the devil?
Who knows.
But we win with him in the starting lineup.
Period.
Howard Mass wrote:You do not have the right to not be offended. Just because something is offensive to you does not mean that it breaks the board rules.
-
W_HAMILTON
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,453
- And1: 16,996
- Joined: Jun 13, 2004
-
And McInnis averages around 30mpg as a starter, so it's not like he's playing for one minute then subbing out the rest of the game.
Having said that, if that brown bat starting at PG, playing for one minute, can get us a win in February, I'd start him at PG, too.
It's about winning. Probably even moreso for Vincent, since his job is probably on the line. He wants to win. And like it or not, we win when McInnis is our starting PG.
Having said that, if that brown bat starting at PG, playing for one minute, can get us a win in February, I'd start him at PG, too.
It's about winning. Probably even moreso for Vincent, since his job is probably on the line. He wants to win. And like it or not, we win when McInnis is our starting PG.
Howard Mass wrote:You do not have the right to not be offended. Just because something is offensive to you does not mean that it breaks the board rules.
-
W_HAMILTON
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,453
- And1: 16,996
- Joined: Jun 13, 2004
-
He'd be playing alongside those other guys, which means their winning percentage would go down as well. Unless they get injured and sit out, which is basically why Wallace is up there in winning percentage now (he's sat out a sizable portion of this atrocious February).
So, he'd still most likely have the highest winning percentage as a starter, even if we continue to stink the rest of the season.
I'd probably prefer him not start, because again, I don't want a journeyman PG coming in and ruining our chances at a better lottery pick and setting us back another couple of years due to a few meaningless end-of-season wins. I'd much prefer Felton just to start.
So, he'd still most likely have the highest winning percentage as a starter, even if we continue to stink the rest of the season.
I'd probably prefer him not start, because again, I don't want a journeyman PG coming in and ruining our chances at a better lottery pick and setting us back another couple of years due to a few meaningless end-of-season wins. I'd much prefer Felton just to start.
Howard Mass wrote:You do not have the right to not be offended. Just because something is offensive to you does not mean that it breaks the board rules.
-
Paydro70
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,805
- And1: 225
- Joined: Mar 23, 2007
Wow, Hamilton, you really seem kind of serious.
I mean... really we're talking about an 8-11 stretch where he started between December 29 and February 1. Interestingly, he not only started, but played an average of 30 minutes, which is obviously more than his season average. I guess it's theoretically possible that something about McInnis starting causes the rest of the team to play better. Certainly there's no argument to be made that HE plays better, or is anything less than horrible.
I have no idea what this magical factor could be... which makes me think it doesn't exist.
I mean... really we're talking about an 8-11 stretch where he started between December 29 and February 1. Interestingly, he not only started, but played an average of 30 minutes, which is obviously more than his season average. I guess it's theoretically possible that something about McInnis starting causes the rest of the team to play better. Certainly there's no argument to be made that HE plays better, or is anything less than horrible.
I have no idea what this magical factor could be... which makes me think it doesn't exist.
-
BeesWax
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,855
- And1: 1,660
- Joined: Jul 04, 2001
-
These +/- stats are highly overrated. They do not take into account who you are playing against. He plays more against starters than most of the guys on the bench. Also he is not playing horribly, he is not great but not bad. There is nothing magical about it he helps win in ways that may or may not statistically show up. But I think we would all agree we would rather currently be in the playoff picture than anything. Having him start is the best thing we have done all year when it comes to wins and losses.
-
Walt Cronkite
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 13,888
- And1: 1,118
- Joined: Jul 02, 2006
- Location: Raleigh
-
-
Paydro70
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,805
- And1: 225
- Joined: Mar 23, 2007
jdm, even Hamilton isn't claiming that Jeff is anything less than horrible. He is. He cannot shoot, his passing is poor, he turns the ball over, and he's bad on defense. I have no idea what NBA skill he actually possesses. If the team plays better when he starts, I don't think it has anything to do with him.
-
BeesWax
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,855
- And1: 1,660
- Joined: Jul 04, 2001
-
Lets see here. Since stats are all there is let me put my math degree to work.
3.03 Assist to turnover ratio for Jeff ahead of:
Steve Nash
Derron Williams
Jason Kidd
Baron Davis
So for someone who just turns the ball over he does that alot less than these other guys compared to the amount of good passes he throws. Am I saying he is better than them, no. He should not even be mentioned with them, but this is to prove a point. His defense is not great but no where near what Carroll attempts to call defense. Jeff plays a decent game and does not try to do things he is unable to do. He is not a bad shooter he just does not shoot much. He is shooting better than Carroll, from the feild, a guy who can only shoot. Jeff has no range but he doesn't force alot of shots up either. I know there are better options out there but he is what we have now and it works. I just don't see how he is horrible other than people are just pissed that he is playing with Felts at the same time.
3.03 Assist to turnover ratio for Jeff ahead of:
Steve Nash
Derron Williams
Jason Kidd
Baron Davis
So for someone who just turns the ball over he does that alot less than these other guys compared to the amount of good passes he throws. Am I saying he is better than them, no. He should not even be mentioned with them, but this is to prove a point. His defense is not great but no where near what Carroll attempts to call defense. Jeff plays a decent game and does not try to do things he is unable to do. He is not a bad shooter he just does not shoot much. He is shooting better than Carroll, from the feild, a guy who can only shoot. Jeff has no range but he doesn't force alot of shots up either. I know there are better options out there but he is what we have now and it works. I just don't see how he is horrible other than people are just pissed that he is playing with Felts at the same time.
-
W_HAMILTON
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,453
- And1: 16,996
- Joined: Jun 13, 2004
-
No, I don't think Jeff McInnis is exactly a good player.
At the same time, he gets more criticism around here than he deserves. Most of the time, he's just providing nothing. Not good, not bad, just nothing really.
You'd think he's some vital part of our team the way people blame him for everything.
The best way to get him banished back to the bench is to win when he's not in starting lineup.
Too bad they haven't been able to do that lately.
At the same time, he gets more criticism around here than he deserves. Most of the time, he's just providing nothing. Not good, not bad, just nothing really.
You'd think he's some vital part of our team the way people blame him for everything.
The best way to get him banished back to the bench is to win when he's not in starting lineup.
Too bad they haven't been able to do that lately.
Howard Mass wrote:You do not have the right to not be offended. Just because something is offensive to you does not mean that it breaks the board rules.
-
Bowens
- Inactive user
- Posts: 1,165
- And1: 1
- Joined: Nov 04, 2007
W_HAMILTON wrote:No, I don't think Jeff McInnis is exactly a good player.
At the same time, he gets more criticism around here than he deserves. Most of the time, he's just providing nothing. Not good, not bad, just nothing really.
You'd think he's some vital part of our team the way people blame him for everything.
The best way to get him banished back to the bench is to win when he's not in starting lineup.
Too bad they haven't been able to do that lately.
I agree that he gets a lot of undeserved criticism because that criticism should be directed towards the front office who chose to bring him back. The front office should have gone out and got someone better, since they were having doubts about Raymond being a point guard.