Game 16: Los Angeles Lakers (13-2) @ Memphis Grizzlies (5-9) - 8:00 PM ET

[danfantastk32]

And by all means.....throw your hat in the ring, next time we need a coach. You seem to think you can do better. I'd be cool with that.

[Ball so hard]

By saying "I don't hold any NBA statistical data in high regard" you're just dismissing any evidence against your position.

Statistics, the ones kept by the sports bureaus for years, are recordings of what has happened. Many are very flawed (Blocked shots, steals, assists and individual rebounds are ones I believe are very poor) and are the result of a very dynamic and interdependent set of circumstances. To mix these into statistical analysis methods and believe that you can predict future outcomes is not considered viable by anyone who really knows about predictive modeling. This is what I do not hold in high regard at all. I do know a little about it as well. I began modeling predictively the financial markets out of college in the late 80's through the early 2000's. I've modeled voter data for both national and local elections, for the healthcare industry, for the department of defense as a contractor and for NOAA as a 3rd party contractor. I actually have worked with a couple people who have tried to find a way of predictive modeling for the NFL to use to bet on games.... it's failed miserably and these guys can tell you where an untested missile will land 100 miles downrange within a foot. The data needed to predict a game with literally hundreds of thousands of variables just doesn't exist. Advanced statistics are all based on very flawed rearward looking stats that were largely invented by agents to get players paid more 40-50 years ago.

I'm done.... Rondo sucks... Kuzma sucks... Lebron is hated by the refs and I'm an idiot. That should stop this....

You're deeply mistaken about advanced stats. Most advanced stats aren't used to predict future outcomes.

What exactly do you consider failing miserably anyway? Would let's say, 55 percent success rate be considered a failure? I've done well doing predictive modeling across various sports and I can assure you it's not the same thing as NBA advanced stats.

Some advanced stat such as TS% is really quite useful; there really ins't anything complex about this stat. I'm really not sure how you can simply throw out all advanced stats as borderline useless. I have an issue with people misusing stats... this is obviously different from saying a given stat is garbage.

You can also still learn a great deal from flawed data.

[Ball so hard]

You know this to be true? How?

Nah, just an educated guess given what we've seen on the court and know about Rondo. I see no other reason why he'd be getting as many minutes as he has been otherwise.

Well, we don't really have a great crew of PG's at our disposal. And he's the 'veteran presence' out there. I'll throw my stats into the fray here......and I see Caruso rockin a 9.15 per.....which is like Ingram's brutal rookie season type per. Rondo has a 15-something per.

Seems like playing Caruso would be the detriment, if we want to go purely stat-based. Throw in that fact that there might be a little bit of politics / pecking-order / familiarity with Rondo and AD, and I don't know why we'd do anything else.

This is the issue with having 2-3 guys who gobble up the bulk of a team's salary. You're stuck putting band-aids on the holes in your squad.

"The PER is computed using a detailed, complex formula that, in essence, adds for positive stats such as rebounds, assists, and steals, and subtracts for negative stats such as shots missed or turnovers."

When you consider Rondo's impressive rebounding and passing ability, low fga, low TO, etc. he's a perfect candidate to do well in the PER category. At the other end of the spectrum, Caruso is a very "scrappy" player who doesn't quite fill the boxcore. Though he doesn't really do anything particularly well, he's quite disruptive on the defensive end.

[Landsberger]

By saying "I don't hold any NBA statistical data in high regard" you're just dismissing any evidence against your position.

Statistics, the ones kept by the sports bureaus for years, are recordings of what has happened. Many are very flawed (Blocked shots, steals, assists and individual rebounds are ones I believe are very poor) and are the result of a very dynamic and interdependent set of circumstances. To mix these into statistical analysis methods and believe that you can predict future outcomes is not considered viable by anyone who really knows about predictive modeling. This is what I do not hold in high regard at all. I do know a little about it as well. I began modeling predictively the financial markets out of college in the late 80's through the early 2000's. I've modeled voter data for both national and local elections, for the healthcare industry, for the department of defense as a contractor and for NOAA as a 3rd party contractor. I actually have worked with a couple people who have tried to find a way of predictive modeling for the NFL to use to bet on games.... it's failed miserably and these guys can tell you where an untested missile will land 100 miles downrange within a foot. The data needed to predict a game with literally hundreds of thousands of variables just doesn't exist. Advanced statistics are all based on very flawed rearward looking stats that were largely invented by agents to get players paid more 40-50 years ago.

I'm done.... Rondo sucks... Kuzma sucks... Lebron is hated by the refs and I'm an idiot. That should stop this....

You're deeply mistaken about advanced stats. Most advanced stats aren't used to predict future outcomes.

What exactly do you consider failing miserably anyway? Would let's say, 55 percent success rate be considered a failure? I've done well doing predictive modeling across various sports and I can assure you it's not the same thing as NBA advanced stats.

Some advanced stat such as TS% is really quite useful; there really ins't anything complex about this stat. I'm really not sure how you can simply throw out all advanced stats as borderline useless. I have an issue with people misusing stats... this is obviously different from saying a given stat is garbage.

You can also still learn a great deal from flawed data.

I really don't care to debate this further. See the "I'm an idiot" line above to get this the F over with.

[danfantastk32]

I really don't care to debate this further. See the "I'm an idiot" line above to get this the F over with.

Awww...and right when this was getting really boring too. =0)

Thank god I was sick. I'd have never made it as long as I did otherwise.

[DS17]

Look guys. If we want to keep AD, We have to keep rondo. We keep rondo we make AD and boogie happy.

[Ball so hard]

Nah, just an educated guess given what we've seen on the court and know about Rondo. I see no other reason why he'd be getting as many minutes as he has been otherwise.

Well, we don't really have a great crew of PG's at our disposal. And he's the 'veteran presence' out there. I'll throw my stats into the fray here......and I see Caruso rockin a 9.15 per.....which is like Ingram's brutal rookie season type per. Rondo has a 15-something per.

Seems like playing Caruso would be the detriment, if we want to go purely stat-based. Throw in that fact that there might be a little bit of politics / pecking-order / familiarity with Rondo and AD, and I don't know why we'd do anything else.

This is the issue with having 2-3 guys who gobble up the bulk of a team's salary. You're stuck putting band-aids on the holes in your squad.

Rondo's "veteran presence" got him thrown out of Friday's game. Caruso has a 6.8 net rating, higher than Rondo. He also has good size at 6'5 and is playing meaningful minutes for the first time in his career. All things considered, he's doing pretty well. Cook also has a much better net rating than Rondo. We'd be better off with either playing instead of Rondo.

Not sure what their net rating were at the time of your post, but currently both Caruso and Rondo are at an identical net rating of a -3.0. It's simply not rational to regularly bash Rondo while praising Caruso. The whole Rondo should never be on the court with Lebron narrative is also a bit overblown. Last season they were definitely a net negative while playing together; this year that's simply not the case. For the record I previously stated I did not like Rondo and Lebron on the court at the same time. However, after scrubbing through some of the data, I now realize that Rondo playing with Lebron is not necessarily the issue. What's most important is who else is on the court with those two players. Rondo and Lebron lineups are an overall +23.7 diff this season according to cleaniningglass.com. There is only one Lebron-Rondo lineup that is a net negative this year - Rondo, Daniels, James, Kuz, and Howard. Last season was disastrous for many reasons.

https://www.cleaningtheglass.com/stats/player/3163/lineups?season=2019&PG=3163&on=1785#tab-four_factors

[thebigbird]

Well, we don't really have a great crew of PG's at our disposal. And he's the 'veteran presence' out there. I'll throw my stats into the fray here......and I see Caruso rockin a 9.15 per.....which is like Ingram's brutal rookie season type per. Rondo has a 15-something per.

Seems like playing Caruso would be the detriment, if we want to go purely stat-based. Throw in that fact that there might be a little bit of politics / pecking-order / familiarity with Rondo and AD, and I don't know why we'd do anything else.

This is the issue with having 2-3 guys who gobble up the bulk of a team's salary. You're stuck putting band-aids on the holes in your squad.

Rondo's "veteran presence" got him thrown out of Friday's game. Caruso has a 6.8 net rating, higher than Rondo. He also has good size at 6'5 and is playing meaningful minutes for the first time in his career. All things considered, he's doing pretty well. Cook also has a much better net rating than Rondo. We'd be better off with either playing instead of Rondo.

Not sure what their net rating were at the time of your post, but currently both Caruso and Rondo are at an identical net rating of a -3.0. It's simply not rational to regularly bash Rondo while praising Caruso. The whole Rondo should never be on the court with Lebron narrative is also a bit overblown. Last season they were definitely a net negative while playing together; this year that's simply not the case. For the record I previously stated I did not like Rondo and Lebron on the court at the same time. However, after scrubbing through some of the data, I now realize that Rondo playing with Lebron is not necessarily the issue. What's most important is who else is on the court with those two players. Rondo and Lebron lineups are an overall +23.7 diff this season according to cleaniningglass.com. There is only one Lebron-Rondo lineup that is a net negative this year - Rondo, Daniels, James, Kuz, and Howard. Last season was disastrous for many reasons.

https://www.cleaningtheglass.com/stats/player/3163/lineups?season=2019&PG=3163&on=1785#tab-four_factors

LeBron has been killing it with everyone this year (he doesn't have a negative rating with anyone), and the fact that the LeBron/Rondo lineup is a +23.7 and Rondo is a -3.0 on the year tells you how bad he's been when he hasn't had LeBron helping him... And running the second unit when LeBron is on the bench was the whole reason why Rondo was brought back. If you were going to sign a guard to play with LeBron you'd sign a 3 and D guy, or at least someone who can do one of those two things.

As for why I bash Rondo but not Caruso, it's because this is the first time Caruso has ever gotten rotational minutes on a contending NBA team. Same reason why I don't hate on Kuzma. It's the first time they've ever played basketball with adults and not a team full of kids with no expectations. It'll take some time for them to adjust. Caruso has been playing very well with LeBron. The two have a +14.6 net rating on the season in the 10.5 mpg they play together.

[Kilroy]

Look guys. If we want to keep AD, We have to keep rondo. We keep rondo we make AD and boogie happy.

I think this needs a little more detail on it... I'm sure if we did Rondo dirty in some way, it might give AD and Cousins second thoughts about staying... But if we give him his chances, and he either can't play at the level needed, or we have someone better lined up in trade, I'm sure Cousins and AD will understand...
If it makes it easier for AD to win a Championship by letting Rondo go, you have to assume, based on everything we know about the NBA, he'd have no problem with us shipping Rondo out.