Let's Talk About Mario

[OrlandoNed]

Well according to the ratings that someone posted a little while back, we are already a better TEAM with Mario in the line up...

The Magic drafted Hezonja #5 overall. That's not a cheap investment. Ideally, you make those picks with the hopes that you DON'T have to spend big in order to cover your ass at that position. Hennigan better hope to hell that Hezonja is good enough to be a starter on a contender, otherwise the pick was made in poor confidence... and we should've traded it instead.

But I doubt that is the case, when Hennigan drafted Hezonja, we were already stacked at the position (Tobias, Fournier, Gordon). So he must have been REALLY HIGH on him. I'm not on the fence regarding my interpretation of Hennigan's expectations of Hezonja. They must be HIGH. Definitely high enough to foresee him being a starter on a contender.

Speaking of Gordon, he is not strictly a PF. If Hezonja was made the starting SF, I don't think we need to back him up with a "small time free agent". I think Gordon could help solidify us at SF better than a small FA would.

All this talk of Batum, Barnes, Parsons... I really don't get why Magic fans want this... or even expect that Hennigan would do something like that. I mean... I guess it could happen, but if it does... well then, Alex Martins did it and Hennigan should start brushing up his resume.

I know the numbers say we're better with Mario, unfortunately Skiles doesn't care and lets Fournier continue to play selfishly.

If Gordon is going to play backup SF, what do we do with that gaping hole at PF where we currently have no legit options aside from Gordon?

We are talking about Batum, Barnes and Parsons because the front office has been preaching that they want to make big free agent splashes and that Payton, Oladipo, Gordon and Vucevic are the future at PG, SG, PF and C. If those facts are true, what other position are they intending to upgrade at when free agency is very SF heavy?

Well Skiles played Tobias selfishly too and Hennigan got rid of him on the cheap. This after saying how he was an important player for the Magic during the summer. That's typical GM talk.

In your post you ask "what other position are they intending to upgrade (other than SF)" and also mention "gaping hole at PF". So I think you answered your own question.





Has the front office really come out and say they are wanting to make a big free agent signing, because that doesn't sound like Hennigan's style.

I see as Gordon as the new prototypical PF ala Draymond Green. Assuming Gordon will be primarily SF, (which I don't think will happen and everybody else locked in at PG, SG and C) we are going after a quality starting PF, but who is that going to be? Everybody not named Horford or Anderson is either too old or too far buried on their teams bench to bother going after. Do we really want to create a god awful defensive frontcourt of Anderson and Vuc? What if we miss on Horford?

Aside from Horford, the 2016 PF class is just not worth pursuing. The SF class was the deepest class with elite talent, but with Parsons hurt and likely opting into his last year with Dallas, it's down to just Batum and the restricted Barnes.

[zelenooq]

Seriously? Evan has been the most consistent player Orlando has had this season. I want Mario to get a chance too, but I can't possibly see how you think Mario is better than Evan.

I don't understand this board. Why are our best scorers criticized for playing selfish basketball? Evan is in the top 20 in the NBA in 3 pointers made, and in percentage. He needs to shoot, not pass to Jason Smith for a long 2 or back to Elfrid to jack up something.

Maybe in your paralel universe we are playoff team where Hezonja is logjam prospect and Fournier is locked on 5 years team friendly deal so we have no time to develop trough playing rookie. But in my world Fournier is contract warrior who is betting on himself that he will be payed this summer, by Magic or any other team willing to pay ( probably somebody like 76ers ). And in same time Hezonja is 5# draft pick who is ranked #17 in min played by rookies. Even second round picks ( on better teams than Magic) are getting more playing time.

And talking about productivity, Batum 26 points, Lebron 18 ( when they swiched Oladipo on him ), DD 26 points, Evan Turner 16 points on 11 shots are just few of guys who destoyed Fournier on defense, Batum being worst to eye test where he was targeting Fournier whole game long. Last game is best example why long term Fournier is nowhere near player that you can keep as SF. He played 33 min against above average Eastern team, he went 5-16 , but ok, he didn't have his best night, HOWEVER how da F starting SF in this league can finish game with ZERO REBOUNDS???? To go with TWO FREAKING ASSISTS ONLY? What a hell he can do at SF really? He can't defend, can't block shots (4 blocks in almost 65+ games) ,he is average at stealing balls, he can't rebound and he is selfish passer for player with high usage ( 2,7 apg puts him in Harris range -below average for SF ). Just what a hell makes him good ? Dude is second offensive option on a team right now ( 4 games without Vuć) he had ONE great game vs non playoff team- Denver, one solid game - Raptors 21 points ( where his man outscored him -DD 26 ) and did solid job filling box score being usless really ( vs Portland, blowout by almost 40 points ), where in reality he only played 1 quater good and was no factor to rest of a game.

We turned offense to him in last 12 games, we are 3-9 in that period, that puts us in rage of Lakers, Nets and 76ers in win percentage.

First of all, it should be pretty clear to you that Evan is being asked to play out of position. That's not his fault. He's an SG. I'm not arguing that Evan is better for this "make the playoffs" agenda. That ship has sailed and we should be playing Mario as well. That's not my point. My point is, Evan is the better player right now, not that he should bump Mario out of PT.

Evan has improved in both his volume and efficiency ever year he's been in the league. I don't really see how that's being a "contract warrior". Do we really care that our guards are not rebounding or blocking shots? Other than Oladipo, Vucevic, and Smith, who should Evan be passing to who can get a better shot? He has the highest TS% on the team, why would you not want him to get shots up? His TOV% is the lowest of any guard on our team, so he's more careful with the ball than anyone else.

Because basketball is team sport
That means
Open teammates has better percentage than you not wide open even you are better shooter
With ballmovement and with wide open shot everyone is involved and with working temperature, not gettingcold
It is easier for opposite team to defender selfish player than player willing to pass
Same with passing to only one guy everyone knows

[Skin]

People need to stop complaining about Evan Fournier...Fournier is 23.145, that is barely two years older than Mario Hezonja. He is still two years away from entering his prime. He is also developing plus is playing out of position:

Top TS% amongst guards and forwards with:
+1400 minutes (quality sample size)
+40 games started (vs starting quality competition):



Top Assist % for players that are 6'6" to 6"9" (small forwards) with:
+1400 minutes (quality sample size)
+40 games started (vs starting quality competition):



...and the players in front of Mario Hezonja are all very young, all lottery picks, and deserved their minutes over him:

Do you think Fournier is good enough to start for the Magic as a team that is a true contender?

Both Mario and Fournier are maybe's to your question.

Nobody knows how good they'll both end up being once they enter their prime - which at the very earliest is 25 years old. The same goes for Oladipo. We also don't know what position Aaron Gordon ends up playing. Plus the Magic will add multiple players this summer with a top 10 pick and room for two max players.

There are just too many variables to even remotely begin to assign who is the starter. You certainly don't let Fournier get away until you know for sure.

Put it this way, if Mario is putting up the numbers Fournier is right now in a 1.5 years when he turns 23, Magic fans would be ecstatic. Both are similar in size 6-8 215 vs 6-7 205. Mario is more athletic; Fournier is more savvy; both can shoot lights out; neither is a good defender; Mario is a much better passer, Fournier is a much better ball handler.

For all we know, it could be both Fournier and Hezonja starting and Oladipo off the bench. We just don't know yet, which is why its naive for people to say Skiles should just hand Hezonja the starting role or gift him minutes, and sacrifice Fournier's to do so.

Why is it a maybe for Fournier? At this point, he is mostly arrived at what his potential is. The same is not true for Hezonja.

Also, if Hezonja develops into what Fournier is right now, then many fans won't be "ecstatic". Most are hoping for way more than that. "Chasing a Superstar" has been used as a defense ever since Henny took BPA over Need in the draft. I have heard ad naseum, how the Magic are/were in desperate need for a Superstar and how Hezonja at #5 gave us the best chance at that. So if Hezonja comes up equating to what Fournier is now... then yeah... I wouldn't expect an "ecstatic" fan base.

The life of a GM is not filled with a lot of certainties. Yes, there are a lot of "maybes", but a good GM has to have a plan and has to have faith in his vision and his decision making. If he's sitting there thinking "for all we know Dipo, Fournier, Hezonja or someone else MIGHT be our answer" then I already know we're in trouble because our GM is lost. But if he's sitting there with a plan where he knows where his true talent is and creates an environment for them to succeed, then he will fulfill his vision and find merit in his decision making.

I see your fear in not wanting to let go of Fournier until you know what Hezonja is, but if he's just a safety net, and you truly don't feel at this point that he's our solution to being a contender, then I think it's better for us to let him go and try to get something back in a S&T. If Fournier is a "maybe" at this point, then we need to cut ties. Because Hezonja is also a "maybe" but his upside is much higher and our ratings as a team are better with him already.

[Skin]

I know the numbers say we're better with Mario, unfortunately Skiles doesn't care and lets Fournier continue to play selfishly.

If Gordon is going to play backup SF, what do we do with that gaping hole at PF where we currently have no legit options aside from Gordon?

We are talking about Batum, Barnes and Parsons because the front office has been preaching that they want to make big free agent splashes and that Payton, Oladipo, Gordon and Vucevic are the future at PG, SG, PF and C. If those facts are true, what other position are they intending to upgrade at when free agency is very SF heavy?

Well Skiles played Tobias selfishly too and Hennigan got rid of him on the cheap. This after saying how he was an important player for the Magic during the summer. That's typical GM talk.

In your post you ask "what other position are they intending to upgrade (other than SF)" and also mention "gaping hole at PF". So I think you answered your own question.





Has the front office really come out and say they are wanting to make a big free agent signing, because that doesn't sound like Hennigan's style.

I see as Gordon as the new prototypical PF ala Draymond Green. Assuming Gordon will be primarily SF, (which I don't think will happen and everybody else locked in at PG, SG and C) we are going after a quality starting PF, but who is that going to be? Everybody not named Horford or Anderson is either too old or too far buried on their teams bench to bother going after. Do we really want to create a god awful defensive frontcourt of Anderson and Vuc? What if we miss on Horford?

Aside from Horford, the 2016 PF class is just not worth pursuing. The SF class was the deepest class with elite talent, but with Parsons hurt and likely opting into his last year with Dallas, it's down to just Batum and the restricted Barnes.

Gordon is perfectly fine as a small ball PF. He is also our best defender against top scoring SFs. So there will be times where he alternates between both positions. We have alternatives at SF, but we do not have alternatives at PF. So while the names like Batum and Barnes are brought up, I don't get it. Unless you're ready to call quits on Hezonja. We have bigger needs at PG and PF... even C... especially if you really believe Gordon at PF is your ideal placement for him, then Vucevic is a less than ideal pairing next to Gordon at PF.

Bottomline, we have depth at SF... and that's not even including Fournier if we bring him back.

I totally get that the FA market is weak at PF, but that is no reason to go blow your load on another position that we already have possible solutions for with 2 Top 5 picks capable of playing for it right now for us. That is why I asked, where it came off that the Magic want to use our cap space for this summer. We could save it for next summer, could we not? A bad FA signing would set us back way longer than one more year of waiting to spend it more wisely.

[yoyojw17]

Well Skiles played Tobias selfishly too and Hennigan got rid of him on the cheap. This after saying how he was an important player for the Magic during the summer. That's typical GM talk.

In your post you ask "what other position are they intending to upgrade (other than SF)" and also mention "gaping hole at PF". So I think you answered your own question.





Has the front office really come out and say they are wanting to make a big free agent signing, because that doesn't sound like Hennigan's style.

I see as Gordon as the new prototypical PF ala Draymond Green. Assuming Gordon will be primarily SF, (which I don't think will happen and everybody else locked in at PG, SG and C) we are going after a quality starting PF, but who is that going to be? Everybody not named Horford or Anderson is either too old or too far buried on their teams bench to bother going after. Do we really want to create a god awful defensive frontcourt of Anderson and Vuc? What if we miss on Horford?

Aside from Horford, the 2016 PF class is just not worth pursuing. The SF class was the deepest class with elite talent, but with Parsons hurt and likely opting into his last year with Dallas, it's down to just Batum and the restricted Barnes.

Gordon is perfectly fine as a small ball PF. He is also our best defender against top scoring SFs. So there will be times where he alternates between both positions. We have alternatives at SF, but we do not have alternatives at PF. So while the names like Batum and Barnes are brought up, I don't get it. Unless you're ready to call quits on Hezonja. We have bigger needs at PG and PF... even C... especially if you really believe Gordon at PF is your ideal placement for him, then Vucevic is a less than ideal pairing next to Gordon at PF.

Bottomline, we have depth at SF... and that's not even including Fournier if we bring him back.

I totally get that the FA market is weak at PF, but that is no reason to go blow your load on another position that we already have possible solutions for with 2 Top 5 picks capable of playing for it right now for us. That is why I asked, where it came off that the Magic want to use our cap space for this summer. We could save it for next summer, could we not? A bad FA signing would set us back way longer than one more year of waiting to spend it more wisely.

This is one of the things that i was happy to hear henny say in on of his interviews (think it was the season ticket holders event).... he saidthat they weren't going to spend money just so spend or blow their load on inferior talent.

[ezzzp]

Why is it a maybe for Fournier? At this point, he is mostly arrived at what his potential is. The same is not true for Hezonja.

Also, if Hezonja develops into what Fournier is right now, then many fans won't be "ecstatic". Most are hoping for way more than that. "Chasing a Superstar" has been used as a defense ever since Henny took BPA over Need in the draft. I have heard ad naseum, how the Magic are/were in desperate need for a Superstar and how Hezonja at #5 gave us the best chance at that. So if Hezonja comes up equating to what Fournier is now... then yeah... I wouldn't expect an "ecstatic" fan base.

The life of a GM is not filled with a lot of certainties. Yes, there are a lot of "maybes", but a good GM has to have a plan and has to have faith in his vision and his decision making. If he's sitting there thinking "for all we know Dipo, Fournier, Hezonja or someone else MIGHT be our answer" then I already know we're in trouble because our GM is lost. But if he's sitting there with a plan where he knows where his true talent is and creates an environment for them to succeed, then he will fulfill his vision and find merit in his decision making.

I see your fear in not wanting to let go of Fournier until you know what Hezonja is, but if he's just a safety net, and you truly don't feel at this point that he's our solution to being a contender, then I think it's better for us to let him go and try to get something back in a S&T. If Fournier is a "maybe" at this point, then we need to cut ties. Because Hezonja is also a "maybe" but his upside is much higher and our ratings as a team are better with him already.

Sorry but 23 is not "arrived at what he's going to be." Physical prime is 25-29. Steep development continues through 25 for most players and then it sharply tapers off to peak between 27-28. In fact, between 23 to 25 is when most players make their biggest stride in development. I can give dozens of examples in the past few years, here are a couple of similar type players as Fournier:



Hezonja is also not stopping his development at 23; at that point - just like Fournier - he will still be two years away from hitting the edge of his prime.

He also is not a sure-fire superstar, if he was he would have been picked top 2 or 3 in the draft. That is where players that are pretty good bets to be stars and make an early impact are chosen. He was the best player available at #5, that is all.

Fournier is more than a safety net, he is as much a young prospect as Hezonja, Oladipo or Gordon. Where he ends up in the pecking order we won't know until a couple years down the road.

[Xatticus]

People need to stop complaining about Evan Fournier...Fournier is 23.145, that is barely two years older than Mario Hezonja. He is still two years away from entering his prime. He is also developing plus is playing out of position:

Top TS% amongst guards and forwards with:
+1400 minutes (quality sample size)
+40 games started (vs starting quality competition):



Top Assist % for players that are 6'6" to 6"9" (small forwards) with:
+1400 minutes (quality sample size)
+40 games started (vs starting quality competition):



...and the players in front of Mario Hezonja are all very young, all lottery picks, and deserved their minutes over him:

True shooting percentage isn't a particularly meaningful statistic by itself. There have been many players with higher true shooting percentages that were significant liabilities to their team.

The second column is a rather egregious abuse of statistics. There are so many qualifiers for that list to render it entirely meaningless.

[ezzzp]

True shooting percentage isn't a particularly meaningful statistic by itself. There have been many players with higher true shooting percentages that were significant liabilities to their team.

The second column is a rather egregious abuse of statistics. There are so many qualifiers for that list to render it entirely meaningless.

Name them, and with support data to prove your claim.

How would you establish what is the assist % range amongst SF's?

Put up your qualified stats or STFU.

[Xatticus]

Name them, and with support data to prove your claim. How would you establish what is the assist % range amongst SF's?

Put up your qualified stats or STFU.

Craig Hodges, Hubert Davis, Fred Hoiberg, Steve Kerr, Tim Legler, the Paxson brothers, Steve Novak, Eric Piatkowski, etc..

These are just 3-point specialists off the top of my head.

And to be clear, I think you really overestimate the significance of shooting metrics. The game is far more complex than what they are capable of measuring.

Starting 40 games is a completely arbitrary requirement. It makes zero sense, unless your purpose is to create a list that places Fournier in select company and as near to the top of the list as possible. That he is 15th among such players, despite your efforts, is an indictment of his play. Why not show the complete list of players that met those requirements? Why even include the 1400 minute requirement? How many players that have started 40 games have failed to accrue 1400 minutes?

You hide behind sample size because you do not understand what it means. A sample needs to be only large enough to state with a reasonable amount of certainty that it is representative and not an outlier (there is a formula and the threshold is actually not very high). Flipping a coin 30 times is a large enough sample to expect a representative outcome. It is not a tool one can arbitrarily apply to weed out unwanted statistics.

Your use of statistics to support your arguments amounts to lying.

[Xatticus]

Name them, and with support data to prove your claim.

How would you establish what is the assist % range amongst SF's?

Put up your qualified stats or STFU.

By the way, positions are an archaic and meaningless designation. A player's position is not dictated by his height, but by what he can defend.

If you genuinely wanted to identify his ability to create shots for others, it would need to be tied to usage. Ideally, it would account for the amount of time the player is actually in possession of the ball on offense.

The use of statistics in basketball is still in its infancy. There are no good metrics for the vast majority of what takes place on a basketball court.

[KillMonger]

interesting.....wish i had the requisite grey matter to understand advanced statistics but it seems like with certain requirements you can paint any picture you want.

[ezzzp]

Name them, and with support data to prove your claim. How would you establish what is the assist % range amongst SF's?

Put up your qualified stats.

Craig Hodges, Hubert Davis, Fred Hoiberg, Steve Kerr, Tim Legler, the Paxson brothers, Steve Novak, Eric Piatkowski, etc..

These are just 3-point specialists off the top of my head.

And to be clear, I think you really overestimate the significance of shooting metrics. The game is far more complex than what they are capable of measuring.

Starting 40 games is a completely arbitrary requirement. It makes zero sense, unless your purpose is to create a list that places Fournier in select company and as near to the top of the list as possible. That he is 15th among such players, despite your efforts, is an indictment of his play. Why not show the complete list of players that met those requirements? Why even include the 1400 minute requirement? How many players that have started 40 games have failed to accrue 1400 minutes?

You hide behind sample size because you do not understand what it means. A sample needs to be only large enough to state with a reasonable amount of certainty that it is representative and not an outlier (there is a formula and the threshold is actually not very high). Flipping a coin 30 times is a large enough sample to expect a representative outcome. It is not a tool one can arbitrarily apply to weed out unwanted statistics.

Your use of statistics to support your arguments amounts to lying.

You've got to be joking - what a farce! You had to dig into the late 20th century "off the top of my head" to find players that fit that totally flawed claim. You have one player that played his prime in the 21st century.

That you label Fournier as just a 3pt specialist shows you don't have any clue what you are talking about. 40% of Fournier's shots are within 10' - most of those drives to the rim. Look at his shot distribution this year: 322 3pt fga / 258 fga at the rim / 52 fga in the paint / and 169 from mid range...LOL 3pt specialist...thats just flat out wrong.

And to be clear, I think you really underestimate the significance of shooting metrics. Every single NBA team now has staff focused exclusively on analytics. Experienced highly paid professionals utilize those stats and hired those staffs. You do not know more about the sport than anyone at that level. Quit acting like you do.

40 games/1400 minutes is to filter in the players that have competed vs starters (quality competition) and substantial minutes (2/3's of 2100 which is total minutes range most starters average). Pretty simple really.

....btw I thought you weren't reading my posts anymore...LOL!

[ezzzp]

By the way, positions are an archaic and meaningless designation. A player's position is not dictated by his height, but by what he can defend.

If you genuinely wanted to identify his ability to create shots for others, it would need to be tied to usage. Ideally, it would account for the amount of time the player is actually in possession of the ball on offense.

The use of statistics in basketball is still in its infancy. There are no good metrics for the vast majority of what takes place on a basketball court.

Thats such an oversimplification and incongruent argument.

If Fournier is not playing SF on the Magic right now, then what position is he playing? His primary defensive assignment is defending the taller of the wings - the majority of those players are 6-6 to 6-9...that is why I used that filter.

You keep telling yourself that metrics don't work for basketball, meanwhile there are 30 NBA franchises that have invested a lot of money on advanced analytics. Franchises managed by experience veterans of the industry.

But I guess you think you know more than the NBA Champions Golden State Warriors and their GM and analytics braintrust that was just awarded the Sloan Analytics Award for Best Analytics Franchise.

The Warriors were one of the first NBA teams to invest in analytics devices such as Sport VU cameras, which monitor player movement throughout the game. It goes without saying that the Warriors are one of the analytical innovators in the sport of basketball, so it’s awesome to see them get honored as such...

It takes an entire franchise believing in something like this to make real change possible. That change has helped propel the Warriors all the way to the forefront of not only their conference, but the entire league.

http://www.warriorsworld.net/2016/03/14/warriors-news-team-wins-sloan-analytics-award/

[ezzzp]

interesting.....wish i had the requisite grey matter to understand advanced statistics but it seems like with certain requirements you can paint any picture you want.

Just use common sense. If the poster is a player fan (as in Hezonja fan) - not a Magic fan - then their posts are slanted only in the interest of their idol. You only need to look at when they came on to the forum (and amount of posts) to know who they are. You don't need much grey matter to understand where their allegiance lies and thus why their posts are always slanted anti Fournier etc.

[Xatticus]

You've got to be joking - what a farce! You had to dig into the late 20th century "off the top of my head" to find players that fit that totally flawed claim. You have one player that played his prime in the 21st century.

That you label Fournier as just a 3pt specialist shows you don't have any clue what you are talking about. 40% of Fournier's shots are within 10' - most of those drives to the rim. Look at his shot distribution this year: 322 3pt fga / 258 fga at the rim / 52 fga in the paint / and 169 from mid range...LOL 3pt specialist...thats just flat out wrong.

And to be clear, I think you really underestimate the significance of shooting metrics. Every single NBA team now has staff focused exclusively on analytics. Experienced highly paid professionals utilize those stats and hired those staffs. You do not know more about the sport than anyone at that level. Quit acting like you do.

40 games/1400 minutes is to filter in the players that have competed vs starters (quality competition) and substantial minutes (2/3's of 2100 which is total minutes range most starters average). Pretty simple really.

Nice try, though at least you made me laugh....btw I thought you weren't reading my posts anymore...LOL!

I don't follow the NBA as religiously today as I did then, though I'm sure the very same types of players exist today. Given the evolution of modern NBA offenses, I'd imagine there are more of them around today than ever before.

Yes. That was right off the top of my head.

I didn't say Fournier was a 3-point specialist. There are a lot of different types of players that fall into the category, but I didn't see the need for a comprehensive list. Even back then, the majority of shots from 3-point specialists came from inside of the three point line, but it was their percentage from behind that line that propped up their TS%.

On a side note, TS% is a flawed metric. It is a rudimentary amalgamation of FG%, 3P%, and FT%. When a player is fouled in the act of shooting, it only counts as a FGA if the shot is made.

I can guarantee you that the analytics that those individuals use are not the ones you continually cite. If they were, there would be no point in paying someone with a background in statistics. In the statistical world, those individuals are not paid well. I don't pretend to know more about basketball statistics than they do. My post was specifically in regard to the statistical vile you cited to support your position.

Your filters are garbage. A required number of minutes makes sense, but the threshold is far too high, as even players that play significantly less than that threshold have accumulated enough time to offer representative rates. Whether a player is starting or not makes absolutely no difference at all. The purpose of your qualifiers is to skew the results. Once again, provide the full list to offer context.

When did I say I wasn't reading your posts? You must have me confused with one of the other people that think you are completely full of ****?

[ezzzp]

You've got to be joking - what a farce! You had to dig into the late 20th century "off the top of my head" to find players that fit that totally flawed claim. You have one player that played his prime in the 21st century.

That you label Fournier as just a 3pt specialist shows you don't have any clue what you are talking about. 40% of Fournier's shots are within 10' - most of those drives to the rim. Look at his shot distribution this year: 322 3pt fga / 258 fga at the rim / 52 fga in the paint / and 169 from mid range...LOL 3pt specialist...thats just flat out wrong.

And to be clear, I think you really underestimate the significance of shooting metrics. Every single NBA team now has staff focused exclusively on analytics. Experienced highly paid professionals utilize those stats and hired those staffs. You do not know more about the sport than anyone at that level. Quit acting like you do.

40 games/1400 minutes is to filter in the players that have competed vs starters (quality competition) and substantial minutes (2/3's of 2100 which is total minutes range most starters average). Pretty simple really.

Nice try, though at least you made me laugh....btw I thought you weren't reading my posts anymore...LOL!

I don't follow the NBA as religiously today as I did then, though I'm sure the very same types of players exist today. Given the evolution of modern NBA offenses, I'd imagine there are more of them around today than ever before.

Yes. That was right off the top of my head.

I didn't say Fournier was a 3-point specialist. There are a lot of different types of players that fall into the category, but I didn't see the need for a comprehensive list. Even back then, the majority of shots from 3-point specialists came from inside of the three point line, but it was their percentage from behind that line that propped up their TS%.

On a side note, TS% is a flawed metric. It is a rudimentary amalgamation of FG%, 3P%, and FT%. When a player is fouled in the act of shooting, it only counts as a FGA if the shot is made.

I can guarantee you that the analytics that those individuals use are not the ones you continually cite. If they were, there would be no point in paying someone with a background in statistics. In the statistical world, those individuals are not paid well. I don't pretend to know more about basketball statistics than they do. My post was specifically in regard to the statistical vile you cited to support your position.

Your filters are garbage. A required number of minutes makes sense, but the threshold is far too high, as even players that play significantly less than that threshold have accumulated enough time to offer representative rates. Whether a player is starting or not makes absolutely no difference at all. The purpose of your qualifiers is to skew the results. Once again, provide the full list to offer context.

When did I say I wasn't reading your posts? You must have me confused with one of the other people that think you are completely full of ****?

That red text says all I need to hear.

[Xatticus]

interesting.....wish i had the requisite grey matter to understand advanced statistics but it seems like with certain requirements you can paint any picture you want.

Just use common sense. If the poster is a player fan (as in Hezonja fan) - not a Magic fan - then their posts are slanted only in the interest of their idol. You only need to look at when they came on to the forum to know who they are. You don't need much grey matter to understand where their allegiance lies and thus why their posts are always slanted anti Fournier etc.

I've been a Magic fan since before day one. I only recently stumbled across this board, though I had previously been on some other, now defunct, forums. I'm far too old to idolize any athletes.

I just don't know how to explain this any more plainly. I'm actually an advocate for the use of advanced statistics in anything (basketball included). But I find it offensive when someone abuses the use of statistics to support any argument, whether I am in support of it or not.

I ignore the bulk of the deceptive numbers you post, because you put so much effort into it and I don't really wish to discourage people from embracing the use of statistics. The problem here, is that you have a great deal of zeal, and you drastically overestimate your own understanding of statistics in general. You commit some of the most blatant violations of statistical interpretation that I have ever seen outside of those employed by tobacco companies and the like.

[Xatticus]

That red text says all I need to hear....and you did say you weren't reading my posts anymore but as usual you cower from your own words.

Once again, you revert to banter in the absence of logic. Feel free to go back and cite where I said I wasn't reading your posts anymore (spoiler alert: you won't find it).

[ezzzp]

interesting.....wish i had the requisite grey matter to understand advanced statistics but it seems like with certain requirements you can paint any picture you want.

Just use common sense. If the poster is a player fan (as in Hezonja fan) - not a Magic fan - then their posts are slanted only in the interest of their idol. You only need to look at when they came on to the forum to know who they are. You don't need much grey matter to understand where their allegiance lies and thus why their posts are always slanted anti Fournier etc.

I've been a Magic fan since before day one. I only recently stumbled across this board, though I had previously been on some other, now defunct, forums. I'm far too old to idolize any athletes.

I just don't know how to explain this any more plainly. I'm actually an advocate for the use of advanced statistics in anything (basketball included). But I find it offensive when someone abuses the use of statistics to support any argument, whether I am in support of it or not.

I ignore the bulk of the deceptive numbers you post, because you put so much effort into it and I don't really wish to discourage people from embracing the use of statistics. The problem here, is that you have a great deal of zeal, and you drastically overestimate your own understanding of statistics in general. You commit some of the most blatant violations of statistical interpretation that I have ever seen outside of those employed by tobacco companies and the like.

I'm not talking about you ...you see your name anywhere in that post ...go away troll

[ezzzp]

That red text says all I need to hear....and you did say you weren't reading my posts anymore but as usual you cower from your own words.

Once again, you revert to banter in the absence of logic. Feel free to go back and cite where I said I wasn't reading your posts anymore (spoiler alert: you won't find it).

yea I can delete my own posts too...nobody cares anyhow - but you and I know the truth