Lacob & Co. in Attack Mode

[Chris Porter's Hair]

Noise in a stat doesn't mean it will be wrong. It means it will be unpredictable and you won't be able to tell if it is right or wrong.

[Jester_]

I'm arguing that missing games doesn't make the RAPM irrelevant by virtue of "noise". If the argument is that Curry's numbers were "inflated", Derrick's should show that's not a technical trend.

Either way, if we're going to be so gung-ho about time missed, just look at 2011 numbers. My point stands either way.

[Sleepy51]

You're using his time off as a crutch for a flawed argument. So because he missed a lot of time, he's being used properly? Do you realize how little sense that makes? If anything, his absence would contribute to being misused since there isn't enough time for Jackson to figure out how to use him adequately (particularly with a lack of training camp and being a new coach). Not to mention the fact that he was playing on a shaky ankle and was rarely playing at a 100%.

Either way, your take is wrong. Curry was +2.1 last year and -0.3 in his rookie year (especially impressive considering how long it took him to adjust), missing a combined total of 12 games altogether.

Ellis was -3.4 and -2.9 both those years, missing a total of 20 games altogether. Face it, you're wrong.

You are all over the place and inventing arguments that I have not made. I have addressed and disputed a very specific claim with specific data. I did not initially compare Monta to Curry. I only pointed out a significant contextual issue that should be considered when talking about Curry's numbers this past season. I most certainly did not talk about Curry's rookie year. I did not talk about last year. I addressed your "present tense" claim that Monta is a "GOD AWFUL DEFENDER" ... this year. Monta was not a god awful defender this year. Your take has become stale. Like your take that Monta was a ball pounder or a ball stopper. Those takes were stale as well. Monta improved as a player over the past few years. Circumstances change and players change. But apparently your takes do not.

[Sleepy51]

Noise in a stat doesn't mean it will be wrong. It means it will be unpredictable and you won't be able to tell if it is right or wrong.

thank you.

[Jester_]

My "take" is that Ellis is an awful defender. That take is as true today as it was 3 years ago. Plain and simple.

He progressed from being one of the worst defenders in the league to simply being a bad one. And it only took him 3 measly seasons to do it. Congrats to him.

[Sleepy51]

My "take" is that Ellis is an awful defender. That take is as true today as it was 3 years ago. Plain and simple.

Actually, it's not. But by all means, don't ever let facts get in the way.

[Jester_]

Oh please, don't give me that bull. Your "facts" are biased piss-takes about how he's "misused", the same nonsense we've heard from Monta apologists year in year out.

His defensive RAPM this year, the best year in his career, is -0.6. It's really not such a hard concept to understand. He's a bad defender.

I used to think Monta was a great defender. Then I saw the numbers and it became blatantly obvious I was wrong. You're more than welcome to show me these elusive "facts" you've got, I'd love to change my opinion of him.

[Frank Mulely]

Honestly both guys are pretty weak defensively.

[[The-Warriors]]

Honestly both guys are pretty weak defensively.

[Sleepy51]

I thought Curry looked pretty promising defensively as a rookie. His foul trouble issues and eventually the ankle in his 2nd year compromised his defensive effort. This past season I don't think I can derive anything meaningful about Steph's defense because he only played in 26 of 60 games.

The other issue here is that we have discussed 82games opponent per stats here before. And no one knows how they are charting those numbers. We have asked 82games by email repeatedly to provide explanation of how their opponent counterpart numbers address switches, rotations and crossed matchups which are particularly important issues for a team like the Warriors defensive approach for the last several years. They have never provided any answer. So until someone can explain the methodology behind these numbers their value is highly questionable.

[Sleepy51]

You're more than welcome to show me these elusive "facts" you've got, I'd love to change my opinion of him.

I already posted the link showing that this past season the teams Monta played on allowed fewer points per possession with Monta on the floor than off. It doesn't make him a great defender, and probably not even a good defender, but that result is inconsistent with being a "god awful defender." Why not just climb down off the hyperbole and admit that you oversold the point based on a stale take?

[Jester_]

No you didn't, you showed me an unadjusted defensive rating of the team with him on and off the court... then when I showed you a website explicitly showing the number of points with Monta on the court versus him off the court you countered suggesting you don't know their methodology.

Unadjusted rating is just that, unadjusted, which is why you look at the adjusted +/- of the individual player, which is negative. Any concerns you have with adjusted methodology are doubly so with unadjusted.

Monta Ellis went from being one of the worst defenders in the league to a bad one. You can argue semantics of how I describe it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Monta Ellis has had a negative RAPM every year he's been with us, and for the majority of his time here he was one of the worst defenders in the league.

However, if you're that insistent on nit-picking the words I used to make a point, I'll concede: Monta Ellis is not a god awful defender. He's an awful defender who has spent most of his career being one of the worst defensive players in the entire league. Happy?

Odd that a guy who's so insistent on me appreciating the fact that Monta Ellis can now succesfully guard a paper bag if he puts his mind to it is willing to disregard off-the-charts numbers of our other guard to "noise". It's utter BS to ignore the ridiculous impact Curry had this year while he was on the floor.

[TaylorMonkey]

Er sorry, linked to the wrong year. You're right, this year we did better with Monta on the floor 109 with him on vs 110 with him off: http://www.82games.com/1112/11GSW4.HTM

i.e he was a non factor. Curry on the other hand, opponents scored 105 with him on 111 with him off.

Either way my point stands. Curry was a good defender, Monta in his best year was negligible.

Could this be also linked to Curry's better ball handling rather than his defense? Turnovers also lead to opponent scoring-- and we were starved for ball handlers without Curry. He does have games where he goes nuclear and racks up turnovers but he's probably better than our other options.

Also you mentioned Curry having to guard SG's but the stats you cited were against PG's. What are Curry's stats against SG's? I don't think we switch Monta when the SG is also an overmatch for Curry.

I'm not going to say Curry's a good defender, but he did do well in the Bulls game and then came the ankle, so the Jury's still out.

[Twinkie defense]

Monta Ellis is simply a god-awful defender.

Except that team gave up fewer points with Ellis on the floor than off this year. You've overplayed every stale negative take on Monta all season long and been wrong on your facts over and over and over again. Let it go already.

On Court Opponent Scoring: 107.11 points per 100 possessions
Off Court Opponent Scoring: 107.30 point per 100 possessions

http://basketballvalue.com/player.php?y ... 012&id=417

That's a lot of points per possession, no? So Monta was just as bad as the other bad defenders he was playing with?

[Sleepy51]

No you didn't, you showed me an unadjusted defensive rating of the team with him on and off the court... then when I showed you a website explicitly showing the number of points with Monta on the court versus him off the court you countered suggesting you don't know their methodology.

What are you talking about? Unadjusted +/- is the exact number of points with a player on/off. You countered that with 82 games Opponent counterpart PER numbers. Opponent counterpart PER numbers are PER48 numbers based on the production of selected individual players during a given player's on court minutes. There is no off court sample in opponent counterpart PER. It is strictly an ON COURT measure and one for which no one here, including yourself has knowledge of the method being used to determine WHO the opponent counterpart is on a given play or how responsibility is assigned for the individual mathcups, help defense, switches or crossed matchups on a possession by possession basis. We've had this discussion on this board about the problems with citing opponent counterpart PER. If you can explain how it works then I'll give it some credence in your argument.


As far as defensive RAPM, yes I know monta's 11-12 number is negative -0.7. So is Aaron Affalos -0.6. So is Joachim Noah -0.1, so is Eric Gordon -0.6, so is Andre Miller -1.0, so is Stephen Jackson -0.5, So is Brandon Rush -1.4, so is Klay Thompson -1.3. Nick Batum is -2.5 on the defensive end. Are these all "God Awful Defenders?"

Defensive RAPM numbers range between the +4 and -3.5. Monta's -.6 is in the middle of that range along with quite a few other credible defenders. 275 of the 475 tracked players are in the negative on the defensive end. The "God Awful defenders are in the 2's and 3's and Monta' just ain't one of them. He's in the middle of the pack.

If you want to make a non-hyperbolic statement, then you could say something like: "Monta is not a good defender and trading him for a franchise anchor 7 footer who is amongst the best defenders in the league was a great move" that would be an accurate, defensible and rational statement. You went for the kill shot with a very poor understanding of the data and no context which is what you've been doing with over the top Monta takes all year long. What I don't understand is why you keep undermining your own positions with wild swings for the fences?

[Sleepy51]

Odd that a guy who's so insistent on me appreciating the fact that Monta Ellis can now succesfully guard a paper bag if he puts his mind to it is willing to disregard off-the-charts numbers of our other guard to "noise". It's utter BS to ignore the ridiculous impact Curry had this year while he was on the floor.

And If you had a grasp of the nuance of these statistics you would understand that I am not "disregarding" the off the charts numbers for Curry, I am actually taking a moment to think about them. I do not ignore the impact that Curry had while he was on the floor. I am pointing out the very significant consideration of the negative impact that Curry had by NOT BEING AVAILABLE TO BE ON THE FLOOR.

[Jester_]

If you're concerned about the context of the opponent PER, the exact same issue exists with unadjusted +/-, it completely ignores the context of what happened when the player was on the floor and situations in which he was there. It's a completely arbitrary measure, because if you played Monta Ellis at the same time as you played someone like Ekpe Udoh, that would count in his favour since all unadjusted +/- does is tell you how many points lineups with Monta Ellis included gave up. The entire point in the RAPM is the localize the impact of a particular player to a number.

I've already conceded that I was wrong about Monta Ellis still being a "god awful defender". He's a bad one. But that's besides the point. You're trying to push an agenda that Monta Ellis might actually be a decent defender, which is why you like to latch on and attack me whenever I make a hyperbolic statement about Monta -- despite the fact that we're posting on a board rampant with hyperbolic statements about just about everyone.

Monta Ellis is a bad defender. It's so bad that despite his offensive gifts, in the best year of his career he has a negligible impact on the game on or off the floor. The RAPM has it's drawbacks, but there's no way you can argue two facts: 1) Monta Ellis is a bad (or "below-average" if that helps you sleep at night) defender 2) Monta Ellis is a midling offensive player.

Considering the initial discussion was with respect to Monta's impact versus Curry's, my point still stands. You just decided to latch on to one statement I made and blew it out of proportion, which is particularly disingenuous considering the rampant use of hyperbole to describe Stephen Curry in this thread.

Curry has gotten torn up by the likes of Lawson and Collison to name a few. He just doesn't have the footspeed to keep up with those guys and with his glass ankles it's even worse. Jennings 50 started out with Curry guarding him. Even got broke his ankles broke by Jimmer on one occassion.

There's no denying Monta had the harder matchup each night...

I'm fine with you questioning my facts, but don't act like I'm the only one around here that generalizes things to get his point across, and don't act like that's the reason you called me out. If you're going to act like that, I expect you to call out every person in this thread that's suggested Stephen Curry is a bad defender.

[Sleepy51]

If you're concerned about the context of the opponent PER, the exact same issue exists with unadjusted +/-, it completely ignores the context of what happened when the player was on the floor and situations in which he was there.

Both have limitations but they are not the same qualitatively. Unadjusted +/- is imperfect because of what we KNOW about it. Opponent counterpart PER is imperfect because of what we DON'T KNOW about it. Those are significantly different kinds of problems. Unadjusted +/- includes all of the data irrespective of context, but it includes all the data. It's raw and it's not a "perfect stat" but we at least know what it does and does not include. It includes everything. We have the responsibility to put that information into context based on observation and narrative, or we can use the adjusted numbers to apply mathmatical context. I have not objected to the use of adjusted numbers, but opponent counterpart per is NOT an adjusted number as you mistakenly claimed in your last post.

Opponent counterpart PER assigns the production of a particular player on the opposing team to one particular player. But, Defense is a team sport. How many points the opposing PG scored is NOT solely a result of the actions of the defender paired with him on the lineup card or at the start of a possession. Any rational observer would agree with that. Opponent counterpart PER may or may not be accounting for those changing roles and responsibilities, but we do not know because the methodology for charting that stat has not been made public or defined. In the absence of that information, Opponent counterpart PER can't really be treated as anything more than an indeterminate cherry pick out of the team defensive system.

I don't just dismiss it out of hand or out of convenience. I have given this issue due consideration before. I was on your side of the argument and thought that those numbers had some promise for these kinds of discussions until Floppy asked the questions that I am asking now, and no one at 82games has ever provided the answers.

And again, I point to the actual context of the league wide Defensive RAPM number and we can see that Monta was objectively NOT amongst the worst defenders in the league. Not by a long shot. Your take was OBJECTIVELY off by any measure we've got other than the qualitatively unknown Opponent coutnerpart number. That's what you hung your hat on to start this take, a questionable and unknown PER48 number. It's a meritless argument. It was irrational, jihadist hyperbole. You've admitted that you oversold the take, so I'm satisfied.

[Sleepy51]

I'm fine with you questioning my facts, but don't act like I'm the only one around here that generalizes things to get his point across, and don't act like that's the reason you called me out. If you're going to act like that, I expect you to call out every person in this thread that's suggested Stephen Curry is a bad defender.

Actually, your Monta posts this season have been over the top, whether good or bad. When he was having a good night or game or quarter, you would swing wildy an equally irrationally in the other direction as though you had forgotten the last week or so of hating the guy. I haven't seen you make such wide vacillations in your opinions of other players so it sticks out more than posters who make throwaway takes all the time. Monta seemed to be the only guy who takes you out of the rational zone and into hyperboleville, which is lame since the guy has already been successfully traded for a major upgrade. So why keep beating the dead horse with a flaming trident made of lightning bolts? ... to defend Curry? That's even lamer than if you just hated Monta for humping your dog. Whatever is wrong with Monta doesn't make Curry any better or worse.

My eulogy for Monta's career: Dude was not Lebron James. He shouldn't have been used as if he was. But, it got us Bogut, so maybe everything happens for a reason. Go warriors.

[Jester_]

Both have limitations but they are not the same qualitatively. Unadjusted +/- is imperfect because of what we KNOW about it. Opponent counterpart PER is imperfect because of what we DON'T KNOW about it. Those are significantly different kinds of problems. Unadjusted +/- includes all of the data irrespective of context, but it includes all the data. It's raw and it's not a "perfect stat" but we at least know what it does and does not include. It includes everything. We have the responsibility to put that information into context based on observation and narrative, or we can use the adjusted numbers to apply mathmatical context. I have not objected to the use of adjusted numbers, but opponent counterpart per is NOT an adjusted number as you mistakenly claimed in your last post.

Opponent counterpart PER assigns the production of a particular player on the opposing team to one particular player. But, Defense is a team sport. How many points the opposing PG scored is NOT solely a result of the actions of the defender paired with him on the lineup card or at the start of a possession. Any rational observer would agree with that. Opponent counterpart PER may or may not be accounting for those changing roles and responsibilities, but we do not know because the methodology for charting that stat has not been made public or defined. In the absence of that information, Opponent counterpart PER can't really be treated as anything more than an indeterminate cherry pick out of the team defensive system.

I don't think that's an issue given enough data, and in the context of a game that analyzes data on a play-by-play basis, there's a lot of data. If the team defense regularly allows a particular position to over-produce when the player assigned to handling said player is on the floor, over the course of a few dozen games it becomes fair to say that the individual player has bearing on those results. Unless you're suggesting that the overall calibre of players and the team defense somehow improved when Monta Ellis was off the floor, but we know that's bollocks because our most impactful defensive player (Udoh) was on regularly when Monta was on. I'm fine with agreeing to disagree, but I don't see this as an issue.

And again, I point to the actual context of the league wide Defensive RAPM number and we can see that Monta was objectively NOT amongst the worst defenders in the league. Not by a long shot. Your take was OBJECTIVELY off by any measure we've got other than the qualitatively unknown Opponent coutnerpart number. That's what you hung your hat on to start this take, a questionable and unknown PER48 number. It's a meritless argument. It was irrational, jihadist hyperbole. You've admitted that you oversold the take, so I'm satisfied.

This is incorrect. I didn't say Ellis was the worst defender in the league this year, and I admitted I oversold it. What I did explicitly say was that Monta Ellis has been one of the worst defenders in the league for the majority of his time as our go-to option. Last year he was on the same level as Jordan Crawford, Johnny Flynn and David Lee at the bottom of the barrel. He wasn't much better the year before.

FWIW, he was a fantastic defender in his early years, it was offset by his putrid offensive production. I've been bi-polar on Ellis for the simple reason that he's a tantalizing player who could theoretically be a perennial star, yet for some reason only ever chooses to produce on one end of the court.

For the majority of his time here as our "star", it hasn't been on the defensive end.