JasonThompsonFan
G-League
This is pretty interesting. "The ball don't lie"
check it out:
check it out:
IT vs Kyrie Irving. bballbreakdown
- Thread starter JasonThompsonFan
- Start date
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Oh good lord. I'm embarrassed.
IT did however take his matchups with Irving very personal in his first year, and I remember the first one in particular he had an excellent game against him. Could for whatever reason be one of those problem matchups.
IT did however take his matchups with Irving very personal in his first year, and I remember the first one in particular he had an excellent game against him. Could for whatever reason be one of those problem matchups.
K
KingMilz
Guest
So we have a top 5 PG in the NBA? lmao this can't be real, maybe for 1-2 games he was better but come on what is wrong with the person that made the video.
JasonThompsonFan
G-League
Neither of you must not have watched the entire video. It had nothing to do with when they matched up against each other. It had to do with full season stats. You need to watch the entire video. I agree, I would take Irving over IT all day every day and so would any GM, I was just sharing this because I found it interesting.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Well, now, I'm a little speechless. Irving should be also.
It DOES seem like some people didn't get the point of the video. A quick breakdown is that against all opponents and adjusted for time on the floor, IT looks pretty darn good.
I have been an IT basher. Now I have to think a little and at my young age, that's easier said than done. At a minimum, we got an incredible deal at pick 60.
I'd like to see Vasquez' stats.
It DOES seem like some people didn't get the point of the video. A quick breakdown is that against all opponents and adjusted for time on the floor, IT looks pretty darn good.
I have been an IT basher. Now I have to think a little and at my young age, that's easier said than done. At a minimum, we got an incredible deal at pick 60.
I'd like to see Vasquez' stats.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Uh....you can make anyone look good with a highlight video. Hence why they call it, a highlight video.
I could make one which apparently might convince some that JT is as good as Karl Malone was or that Ryan Anderson is better than Dirk, since apparently a highlight video can also convince at least a few that IT is better than Kyrie.
Unbelievable.
I could make one which apparently might convince some that JT is as good as Karl Malone was or that Ryan Anderson is better than Dirk, since apparently a highlight video can also convince at least a few that IT is better than Kyrie.
Unbelievable.
JasonThompsonFan
G-League
Just another person replying that didn't watch it and thinks it's a highlight video. Makes everyone look lame, making comments that have nothing to do with the video. It isn't a stupid highlight video sheesh! It's a breakdown of stats for the entire season for both players.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
No, I took to task his myopic stats focus in the comments. Here I will just stick to being embarrassed for our fanbase, even if that guy may in fact just be a stats nerd rather than a Kings fan. Makes us look incredibly homeristic to say the least.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
No they really don't.
jcassio
Starter
Yes they really do. Or call me an outlier.
But even though IT deserves more respect than he gets, I'm not convinced that he should be our starting PG. Why? Because (forget the stats for a minute) I too often see him (with my own eyes) as a liability on defense and as a guy who doesn't distribute the ball effectively. So stats or no stats, I think he's tough enough to become a strong(er) defender, and smart enough to learn how to distribute the ball more effectively, but toughness only goes so far when you're 5-9. And only time will tell if IT can become a player that makes his teammates better. So I will hope for the best from our newly acquired PG and hope to see IT grow into a Bobby Jackson role (which is not unimportant).
You are an outlier. Using stats to try and talk up IT in comparison to Kyrie is laughable.
treach1976
Bench
IT had a better year than he gets credit for... no doubt. But even though the stats here are pretty in-depth, this is a little like the Hospital Mortality Rate argument that you might hear in an intro to stats class. Basically goes like this... There are two different hospitals in the same city, one is extremely well-funded with top-in-class doctors, more expensive and generally regarded much higher. The other mostly caters to poorer patients, has average doctors, and a less favorable reputation. However, looking at the Mortality Rates of patients shows that patients are more likely to die during/after treatment in the first hospital rather than in the second. Given a choice, which one do you choose? The error would be choosing the second because of it's lower mortality rate. The mortality discrepancy is actually due to the fact that the more serious cases (later stages of diseases/cancer; more critical injuries, etc.) are sent to the first hospital because of the higher quality of treatment, thus the higher mortality rate. Given the choice, you still choose the first hospital....
This may apply to Kyrie vs IT in that Kyrie IS the focus of opposing team's defense in Cleveland. Teams likely game plan around him and as such are more prepared to shut him down. Cleveland didn't have a Cuz or Reke to worry about. IT was at least third on the list of go-to players for the kings last year.
This may apply to Kyrie vs IT in that Kyrie IS the focus of opposing team's defense in Cleveland. Teams likely game plan around him and as such are more prepared to shut him down. Cleveland didn't have a Cuz or Reke to worry about. IT was at least third on the list of go-to players for the kings last year.
Livinthedream
All-Star
Interesting. This is a board that prides itself on the use of stats and analytics. Why are we throwing these numbers out? Its an honest question.
The tone of the video I got was that perceptions can be misleading and advanced stats can show a truer value. I didn't think the video was saying IT should have been drafted number 1 overall over Kyrie. IT was just used to prove a point.
The tone of the video I got was that perceptions can be misleading and advanced stats can show a truer value. I didn't think the video was saying IT should have been drafted number 1 overall over Kyrie. IT was just used to prove a point.
I could kiss you on the mouth right now.
Because they aren't showing what some would like them to show? Just my two cents...
jcassio
Starter
One of the interesting things about discussion boards (this one included) is the huge percentage of posters who post comments without actually reading the posts they are commenting on (in full). It's obvious how often this happens when you spend a moment considering what they said in relation to the prior comment. But it is what it is, right? People are always looking for short-cuts and they get bored with the details. Some of our posters seem more interested in the quantity of their posts as evidenced by those who continue to say the same thing over and over. And over. But there are those chosen few who have enormous knowledge and insight and I find this board worthwhile because of them.
I tend to agree with Glenn's comments above, although I have never been an IT basher. I think he (IT) has been unfairly criticized by some around here and I think he's a lot better than some are willing to give credit for. I personally thought the video clip was pretty interesting. It seemed to me that the OP was being lambasted unfairly for posting a "highlight video" when that was clearly not the case...
No. Trying to compare the stats of a star player such as Irving to the third option (at best) by extrapolating the data using per 36 is a gross misuse of the information. And it really has nothing to do with the actual numbers, the premise behind the comparison is silly. They are both very very VERY different players, in different situations, and different roles on each team.
You could love or hate either player, but trying to compare their stats doesn't serve a purpose that I can see as their value to each team is completely different.
Gliesian
Bench
This video hurts the credibility of advanced stats and shows that this finagled analysis is not a good model for determining a player's salary. Unfortunately, this was not the analyst's intention. He is showing that worse players can actually be perceived as better than better players. I waited for some requisite, explaining the maladies of this type of comparison. Instead, near the end he says that IT is already fulfilling an elite point guard roll in turnover rates, after adjustments, and then asks who we think the better player is now? History tells me that small starting pgs don't win rings, which is all that really matters, so the question should be sarcastic, but it isn't. I appreciate the information this video brings, but I think the analyst is explaining it completely backwards. For the record, I think IT is great and we are lucky to have him.
If the video was titled "Is IT better than we all think?" instead of being titled "Is It better than Kyrie?" it would be much more palatable. Using thr comparison to show his strengths and how close (or far) he is from one of the best up and coming players (who just dominated the US Select team this summer) it would be something we could discuss. And it still is something we can discuss, if that is the desired topic. But to question if IT is better than Kyrie is absurd and i would assume a bit insulting to anyone who fancies themselves a basketball fan.
Yea, the stats are nice... But the creator of the video is off in the execution of whatever it is he is trying to do.
How do u know the intention of the title from the creator? I read it as a "shock value" to hook u in and then u see that IT is a lot better than his "tradtional" numbers indicate. Which. Is. What. I've. Been. Saying. For. Two. Years.
Nobody thinks IT is better than Kyrie or even in the same realm as him. Not even the greatest IT homer in the history of the universe could say that. But this video clearly was shown to illustrate some of IT's strengths and what he ACTUALLY does well. As opposed to the false perception labeled to him by many fans.
The title is asking if IT is better than Kyrie and the closing statement is asking you to reflect on who had the better season last year. How can you question the intent of the title? Or the final question? It's a terrible title, and a terrible closing question *if* the intent was, as you say, to illustrate IT's strengths and weaknesses. There is no need to start and finish the video by asking you to directly compare his ability to someone far superior to him.
As usual Jamal, you substitute your own meanings and interpretations instead of reading and/or listening to what is being said.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Because they aren't showing what intelligent NBA observers, including EVERY SINGLE COACH, GM, AND PLAYER IN THE NBA, know to be true. Go ahead, send around a poll, ask the question presented in that youtube title to ANYONE associated with the best professional basketball league in the world. See what results you get.
P.S. anyone but a particuallry silly breed of Sacto homers that is.
P.P.S. Kevin Martin has a higher career TS% than Michael Jordan. A higher career eFg%. A higher career 3pt%. And a higher career FT%, while taking nearly the same number of FTs as Jordan per 36. Honest Question: Is Kevin Martin a better offensive weapon than Michael Jordan?
Actually you know...why bother with KMart? Isaiah Thomas also has a higher career TS$, eFG%, 3pt%, and FT% than Michael Jordan. Heck, per 36 he also has averaged more ast/36 and fewer TOs/36 than Jordan. Leading to the next obvious question...
Last edited:
Furthermore, if you read the description of the video it says something along the lines of "Here is our chances to step back and take a look at how these players really and truly compare." It doesn't say "The video was clearly shown to illustrate some of ITs strengths and what he ACTUALLY does well. As opposed to the false perception labeled to him by many fans." as you somehow extrapolated.
Or forum goers who insist on disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing anytime it is possible.
K
KingMilz
Guest
If Thomas was as good as his "advanced stats" show the Kings would have been a far more competitive team last season considering we had Cousins, Evans and according to advanced stats a top 10 PG.....I'm sorry this is a complete disgrace this thread is probably more offensive than the one I made about Viveks daughter that got closed.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
I am not a fan of advanced stats. I think they can be cherry picked to prove a preconceived point. They can be used to deny what the eye sees. My concern with their use is that they might be used instead of actually scouting a player and watching him. I don't know if that's what happened in this video. The underlying premise of the video seems to be that IT is not that much less of a player than Kyrie which I think is hogwash. But then I rely mainly on what I see. The narrator seems to be saying that we can't trust what we see.
I DO buy the idea that we got a steal. That doesn't mean we got an all pro or that we got a guy to build around. There were many days in the last few years where I thought the development of IT was Smart's focus and I think that hurt the team. When we have stats that take into account all the other players on the court, like what effect does Boogie have on IT's stats, for example, I'll be happier. Specifically, the opponent had to focus on Boogie and IT, from day one, knew that part of his job description was to get the ball to the Boogie monster. Not sure he did that enough.
In my world, stats are meant to augment what the eye sees and what an experienced mind can deduce from what he sees. The more stats the better but when the narrator said in essence that IT looks far worse than Kyrie until we dig further into the stats, I got worried about the intent of the video.
I thought it was interesting but why IT vs Kyrie? I could answer, "because when we dig further into the stats we have a video that will make people talk." Makes me wonder how many match-ups the narrator did to come up with one that might be considered "news." Cynical, huh?
I enjoyed the video and the discussion it generated. It made me think but I came to no different conclusion than before I watched it.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll