Who do we want to start?

BeesWax · Post #21 » by **BeesWax** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 6:46 pm

are you talking just big guys meaning 6'7" or taller or in general?

amcoolio · Post #22 » by **amcoolio** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 6:48 pm

Guys in his range (forwards).

I'd argue that Dudley is a stronger player than Durant. Durant is more skilled, sure, and will be a star because he is offensively gifted, but if Durant couldn't score at all, give me Dudley anyday.

SamBone · Post #23 » by **SamBone** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 6:53 pm

amcoolio wrote:You can't be a fan of the Bobcats and hate Dudley.

Dudley does all the things we wished all Bobcats players would. He boxes out, fights for rebounds, isn't afraid to challenge shots, takes smart shots, is willing to take the hard foul or get boned setting a pick against Shaq or Dwight, and looks to get all teammates involved.

His so called lack of athleticism is about as blown up as Okafor's back problems. You can't say he doesn't have any athleticism, because if you think Madsen was ever good enough to get 10 rebounds, nevertheless in his rookie season, then you shouldn't be evaluating talent.

Dudley has more athleticism than half the league. Besides Moon, who has more athleticism on the Raptors than Dudley last night?

I didn't know that being a Cats fan and Dudley fan are a package deal.

I think you are being a little high on your praise. I love his hustle and heart, but he is far from the next coming. I really hope that he will fit into our future plans and should be a solid bench role player to play with Hammer, Ammo and hopefully someday May? Him and JD have shown promise and I really hope the both of them show that they are not the next Fabio

BeesWax · Post #24 » by **BeesWax** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 6:57 pm

Well by that argument if McRoberts could score 25 points a game I would rather have him. I mean if we are taking or adding qualities we can make any player good. If everyone else sucked Dudley would be a star.

Moon, graham and Garbajosa are all more athletic than dudley. And bosh goes without saying so of the F on the roster of toronto, that actually ever play, he is more athletic than............Kapono. Which is like being the prettiest waffle house waitress just does not mean much.

Post #25 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 8:35 pm

ROFL at Garbajosa as more athletically gifted than Dudley, you cannot be serious.

Don't dismissing PER because you don't understand how it works/are bad at math/it doesn't support the "feel-o-meter"/"I watch this guy 82 games a season, I know he's better than X that I've seen twice".

Per is an accurate measure of each function present in the game of basketball besides defense. Defense is excluded because it's very difficult to analyze in a metric, especially in the past (more general statistics are being developed each season).

So if you want to say "Dudley is a worse defender than Madsen so I view them as equals", go on ahead. Chances are everyone will still disagree with you, but at least that's a logical, somewhat debatable argument.

Al Jefferson, Dwyane Wade, Michael Redd and Kevin Martin are only in the top 25 because they're on bad teams... gimmie a break.

chrbal · Post #26 » by **chrbal** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 9:05 pm

Now. Richardson, Felton, Okafor, Mohammed, Dudley. With as many young guys getting floor time as possible.

Next season. Derrick Rose*, Richardson, Wallace, Okafor, Mohammed. Trading Felton to get him unless the team winds up with a high enough pick...which would mean Felton would get traded for frontcourt help (portland??? They want a new PG and have a lot of young talent to move including, hopefully, our backup PG <or stopgap starter> next year...Jarret Jack).

Post #27 » by **Paydro70** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 9:24 pm

Insult PER if you feel like it... any measure you use will show Dudley superior to Madsen. As Walt says, only defense is vague enough that you'll be using your feel-o-meter to argue it, especially about bench guys like these.

BeesWax · Post #28 » by **BeesWax** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 9:27 pm

Please don't tell me I don't understand. I am a math major currently in grad school. So I can look at his system and know how much crap it is. Anyone can make up a system and say it is great but that does not make it so. I think your rose glasses might be getting in the way of your view of duds. He is ok like I said a solid 9th or 10th guy. I like his hustle but I am realistic and know he is what he is an average at best player off what would need to be a deep bench.

Post #29 » by **Paydro70** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 9:29 pm

So I guess you fall into the "doesn't support the feel-o-meter" category?

Madsen is a total scrub, and Dudley is not. They play different positions, and have no other similarities. The comparison is insulting, regardless of team affiliation.

BeesWax · Post #30 » by **BeesWax** » Mon Mar 3, 2008 9:52 pm

If you think that it is true fine. I would compare the two. Duds has a little more offense and a little less defense. I don't think there is much difference between the two.

Post #31 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 12:17 am

You're entitled to your opinion and we're all entitled to tell you how poor of a comparison it is.

Maybe it's the rose colored glasses (BTW, does anyone remember when I bought these? Also...where did I place them, I've been pretty much not posting about the team at all lately because it's been so disappointing...ANYWAYS...)

Yea, Dudley is a total scrub on a team filled with scrubs. PER and every other statistical measure that shows that Dudley is better than Madsen is wrong.

Either way, on this team of scrubs Dudley deserves to start for the rest of the season as an undersized 4...even if it means being relegated to the 9th or 10th spot next year... which of course won't happen because he's a better all around player than May or Morrison.

Crazy jokester!!

BeesWax · Post #32 » by **BeesWax** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 12:34 am

I did not say PER is wrong. I believe is said it was crap. Mathematical crap if you like. It is a joke. I also don't remember calling Duds a scrub but ok fine. Should he start the rest of the season on this team, yes. Wallace should take the rest of the year off to get his head right the last the the bobcats need is the nba version of Dan Morgan. There are not any other real options. Well maybe start Davidson at the 4 some this year. Madsen may have a better PER on this team because he would be important here more than he was anywhere else.

fluffernutter · Post #33 » by **fluffernutter** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 12:48 am

jdm3 wrote:...Which is like being the prettiest waffle house waitress just does not mean much.

Some of those waffle house waitresses are freakin' hot dude.

I'm of the opinion that, most of the time, people overrate Holywood celebs just because they are rich, famous, and well-dressed (for the most part), as well as painfully well scrubbed/pampered/polished. However, take one of the "B" list Hollywood beauties and let her work minimum wage for a year at Waffle House and you might end up with somebody that looks like the prettiest waitress at the local Waffle House.

Which is another way of saying that I think there are a lot of non-famous pretty girls that could look as good, if not better, than a lot of Hollywood actresses...if you gave them clothing, fame, and fortune.

This exempts those truly special beauties, i.e. Angelina Jolie (you won't find her facial bones or eyes in any old diner) or Scarlett Johansson (she has incredibly versatile looks).

BeesWax · Post #34 » by **BeesWax** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 2:48 am

Well I am sorry about the quote. Your Waffle House's must be much different from mine. I first heard the saying from a friend of mine and when I thought about the Waffle House waitresses where I am I saw the relevance. Obviously that is way to general so I am sorry if I offended anyone. For all the quotes like it, it seemed the least politically incorrect. I will choose my words more carefully from now on. I do not mean to offend.

fluffernutter · Post #35 » by **fluffernutter** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 3:24 am

jdm3 wrote:Well I am sorry about the quote. Your Waffle House's must be much different from mine. I first heard the saying from a friend of mine and when I thought about the Waffle House waitresses where I am I saw the relevance. Obviously that is way to general so I am sorry if I offended anyone. For all the quotes like it, it seemed the least politically incorrect. I will choose my words more carefully from now on. I do not mean to offend.

I was just kidding, relax. I was being stupid.

e4Nf6 · Post #36 » by **e4Nf6** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 3:46 am

jdm3 wrote:Please don't tell me I don't understand. I am a math major currently in grad school. So I can look at his system and know how much crap it is.

Oh yeah, well.... I'm going to two grad-schools... and they let me teach some of my classes 'cause I'm so smart... and my grandpa invented math, and he taught me everything he knows, so there....

Incidentally I agree in principle that PER is imperfect (no defense as mentioned above, I think rebounding is overvalued, etc.) but the above is just a non-argument. If you have a problem with PER state it specifically.

ps. Mark friggin Madsen..... Really?! you must be his cousin or something.

oh and I'll cement my Academic cred by having a bibliograpy on my posts from now on:

http://www.countthebasket.com/blog/2008 ... -rebounds/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhibi0aSAZk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrQyYIn5 ... re=related

doc.end · Post #37 » by **doc.end** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 12:17 pm

The Bowen "comparison" was brought here just because it is widely known that dudley had a promise from Spurs. They were going to pick him if he slip to them. If you think about it, it is obvios what his role would be in Sna Antonio. They would acqure him to develop him into Bowen succesor cause Bowen is aging. They wouldn't play him at PF (Duncan) or even out of position at Sg (Ginobili, Finley). He would be Bowen back up and would have chance to take his place in the future.

BeesWax · Post #38 » by **BeesWax** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 2:09 pm

e4Nf6 wrote:
Oh yeah, well.... I'm going to two grad-schools... and they let me teach some of my classes 'cause I'm so smart... and my grandpa invented math, and he taught me everything he knows, so there....

Incidentally I agree in principle that PER is imperfect (no defense as mentioned above, I think rebounding is overvalued, etc.) but the above is just a non-argument. If you have a problem with PER state it specifically.

ps. Mark friggin Madsen..... Really?! you must be his cousin or something.

oh and I'll cement my Academic cred by having a bibliograpy on my posts from now on:

http://www.countthebasket.com/blog/2008 ... -rebounds/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhibi0aSAZk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrQyYIn5 ... re=related

Well congrats on getting to teach classes. And you grandpa must have been quite a person. He might have been the really old dude who taught me calc three because I am sure he was around when it was invented. I can go into why the system is wrong and where the fault is if you want me to. I thought it would get boring and not worth thinking about but here we go. First like he freely admits it only encompasses stat categories he can get not how well the team plays w/ the player or the players general defense. Also it is easy to com in for 10 minutes a game and really go crazy picking up some stats that look impressive when spread to a 40 min average. This however won't translate to an actually 40 minute production or even close in alot of cases and this can work both ways (Carroll needs minutes to get in a groove). Also he set up the system and adjusted the formulas until they fit his version of the NBA which puts a bias in the formulas from the start. And like I said you guys think Duds is great I think he is fair a solid late bench player no reason to insult people just because you can't agree. Lets act like more than 12 year olds.

BeesWax · Post #39 » by **BeesWax** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 2:19 pm

Also I think you guys misunderstand. I want Duds to do well. When we drafted him I was happy. I thought he was going to come of the bench after Morrison, May and Carroll. This puts him at the ninth man where I think he would excel. For what he is having him out there for short burst where he can hustle is best so as not to expose his lack of quickness. If May had his heart that would be one amazing player decent size and feet for a 4 and goo desire but as of now both of those players are lacking.

Post #40 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Tue Mar 4, 2008 6:08 pm

PER is like any other statistical measure, number crunching without analysis is useless.

Example: I do not believe Carl Landry is the 12th best player in the NBA, although his current PER is good for 12th in the league. I do think that in his limited minutes (417 total for the season so far=limited sample size) he has been very efficient. Analytical questions to ask: Were the majority of these minutes in garbage time? Level of talent played against? What was his PER allowed(crude measure of defensive ability, kinda like +/-)? What is the point of diminishing return?

John Hollinger doesn't sit at home scheming up the perfect stat so that people will one day feel the need to stop watching basketball in favor of analyzing it statistically. He was highly influenced by sabremetrics and thus has been one of the largest contributors from the APBRmetrics community, but he's never claimed to have invented the perfect statistical measure.

He has also never "set up the system and adjusted the formulas until they fit his version of the NBA" so he's never has he put "a bias in the formulas from the start".

PER is pace adjusted. PER is adjusted per 40 minutes. The median player is set to 15.00 and the metric is adjusted from there, but it's not like he randomly gives/docks players bonus/penalty points.

I think Dudley can end up being a 6th man ahead of Carroll, Morrison and May. I don't get how you've decided that he excels in short bursts, but I also don't think that he is as exploitable on defense as you've suggested, so that's probably where the diversion in thinking comes from.