One-Two Punches

[The_Jamal]

Well he was arguing that going back to career averages is a bad thing. I told you once I will say it again. 2 pts every 2 games is not I repeat is not significant

If he goes back to pre-11-12 Memphis version, I agree. Last 2 seasons with Memphis and Toronto would be a bad thing. If he's that Rudy Gay, he hurts more than he helps.

Point is, we'll see. He's career high efficiency levels right now. They are far out of line of what he's done the last 165 games. Not enough data to make any real determinations

 

[Entity]

Reading comprehension. Those are his shooting numbers the last 2 and a half seasons. Which is far more indicative of his current level than what he did 5 years ago in 07-08 or his career season in 10-11.

So one year ago is more indicative than the previous 6 years?? Ok let's use that year. 7.5 made and 16.4 attempts
Now 7.4 made 15.4 attempts. Even then it's one missed shot a game. But no I'm not saying this isn't high for him. It is career highs except for threes it's career low. I'm saying I'd take 1 missed shot a game and still be extremely happy.

Cousins is taking 3 more attempts a game and only making 2 more shots a game that's 3% points.

If you take 16 half court heaves A YEAR at the end of quarters that would drop your fg% 2 points. I'm saying 3% is not as huge as is being made out

 

[Entity]

If he goes back to pre-11-12 Memphis version, I agree. Last 2 seasons with Memphis and Toronto would be a bad thing. If he's that Rudy Gay, he hurts more than he helps.

Point is, we'll see. He's career high efficiency levels right now. They are far out of line of what he's done the last 165 games. Not enough data to make any real determinations

I'd say the 165 games is far out of line and not enough data to make any real determinations. Lebron is shooting 9% better than his first 2 MVP seasons. He is in year 11. Is it entirely inconceivable that Gay shoots 2-3 % better than 2 years ago in his 8 the season?

 

[Chubbs]

How is he calling you an idiot? He's saying people should not get cozy with the offensive scoring we've gotten from Rudy because it greatly deviates what he's done the last few years. In both Memphis and Toronto. His 42 games in Memphis in 2012-2013 were horrid. 47% TS, 40% FG. His 50 games in Toronto were equally as bad. 49% TS 41 FG%. The year before showed his numbers at 45% FG and 52 TS%. So essentially, you have to go back 165 games to the last time his numbers resembled what we've seen thus far with us. And even then, those were his career best scoring %'s.

3% FG spike is huge. 4% TS spike is huge. It's the difference of Cousins this season and Cousins last year. Would you be happy with Cousins going back to his scoring levels of last season?

Regardless, it's still far too early to make any statistical assertions to go one way or the other. 10 games is not enough to really decide anything.

The question was whether he is our second best player. None of these stats have anything to do with that.

Lots of stars in this league have lower TS% than average Rudy. So, the problem is what? We have some other mystery second best player I'm not aware of?

 

[Chubbs]

I'd say the 165 games is far out of line and not enough data to make any real determinations. Lebron is shooting 9% better than his first 2 MVP seasons. He is in year 11. Is it entirely inconceivable that Gay shoots 2-3 % better than 2 years ago in his 8 the season?

It's a lot easier to argue the bad numbers are the aberration than the other way around. We already know he was a failed #1 option. But he's been a very good sidekick in his career. Well above average. So far, and it's early, we are seeing that.

 

[Chubbs]

If he goes back to pre-11-12 Memphis version, I agree. Last 2 seasons with Memphis and Toronto would be a bad thing. If he's that Rudy Gay, he hurts more than he helps.

Point is, we'll see. He's career high efficiency levels right now. They are far out of line of what he's done the last 165 games. Not enough data to make any real determinations

The point is not whether or not Rudy gets better or worse. The point is that he's our second best player either way.

 

[Entity]

Eh after 11 years I can't used to it. Back in the day we had some that hated Peja and some that hated cwebb. Always wanted them traded. It was weird. Guess I'm not used to getting a good player and still some wanting him to fail to prove their point or just not like winning at all. I guess they want wiggins or Parker. I'd say that wiggins or Parker at this point could only hope to do what Rudy has

 

[The_Jamal]

The point is not whether or not Rudy gets better or worse. The point is that he's our second best player either way.

Hey, you took me off ignore!

But yea, I don't disagree that he's our 2nd best player. Never did. But I'm also not convinced this is the Rudy we're going to get long-term. That's what i'm arguing with entity

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Guess I'm not used to getting a good player and still some wanting him to fail to prove their point or just not like winning at all.

Sorry, but that's a 100% strawman. HighFlyingMonkey and The_Jamal have both only argued that the current Sacramento sample size is too small to make a solid conclusion about Rudy Gay's current performance level. There is a very wide gulf between that and "wanting him to fail" or "not liking winning".

 

[Entity]

Hey, you took me off ignore!

But yea, I don't disagree that he's our 2nd best player. Never did. But I'm also not convinced this is the Rudy we're going to get long-term. That's what i'm arguing with entity

I don't care. If he drops to 44% or stays at 48 or goes to 46. It's not that nig of a deal. No matter how you slice it its better than what we had. But if a guy plays the way he did for 6 or 7 years and is playing like that now. Why think he would play the way he did for one year? You are almost arguing that he is on the downward slide in his career in efficiency. Id argue that its about to go up. You threw a 37 year old Kevin Garnett in my face earlier about not getting what he did 4 years ago basically saying Rudy can't do what he did 4 years ago. Rudy is 27. Garnett was 33 the year you threw in my face. But for some odd reason you think Rudy can't do it again. Every other player in the league can play at. High level from 27-32 but for some reason Rudy can't. Lebron has better numbers every year he is older than Rudy. But hey maybe you are right and Rudy drops to 44% hell that's Carmelo, Kobe, igudala, etc... etc... I will still take it. Again I take Rudy's last 2 years as the exception not the rule. So why can't we get this Rudy long term when he really is just getting to his prime? So far only one of us is being proved right by his play and its not you

 

[The_Jamal]

Sorry, but that's a 100% strawman. HighFlyingMonkey and The_Jamal have both only argued that the current Sacramento sample size is too small to make a solid conclusion about Rudy Gay's current performance level. There is a very wide gulf between that and "wanting him to fail" or "not liking winning".

Bingo! Apparently, this has gone over the head of a few others in the thread

 

[The_Jamal]

I don't care. If he drops to 44% or stays at 48 or goes to 46. It's not that nig of a deal. No matter how you slice it its better than what we had. But if a guy plays the way he did for 6 or 7 years and is playing like that now. Why think he would play the way he did for one year? You are almost arguing that he is on the downward slide in his career in efficiency. Id argue that its about to go up. You threw a 37 year old Kevin Garnett in my face earlier about not getting what he did 4 years ago basically saying Rudy can't do what he did 4 years ago. Rudy is 27. Garnett was 33 the year you threw in my face. But for some odd reason you think Rudy can't do it again. Every other player in the league can play at. High level from 27-32 but for some reason Rudy can't. Lebron has better numbers every year he is older than Rudy. But hey maybe you are right and Rudy drops to 44% hell that's Carmelo, Kobe, igudala, etc... etc... I will still take it. Again I take Rudy's last 2 years as the exception not the rule. So why can't we get this Rudy long term when he really is just getting to his prime? So far only one of us is being proved right by his play and its not you

No. The only thing I'm arguing is it's too soon to make any conclusions about Sacto Rudy's play because it deviates from his career numbers, especially because he's a few years removed from his best seasons . Everything else is just an incorrect assumption on your part.

 

[Entity]

Sorry, but that's a 100% strawman. HighFlyingMonkey and The_Jamal have both only argued that the current Sacramento sample size is too small to make a solid conclusion about Rudy Gay's current performance level. There is a very wide gulf between that and "wanting him to fail" or "not liking winning".

No the straw an here is the argument of what might, could, maybe happen. My argument is what is happening. Your validation of a future that has not happened is no validation of the opposing argument it's just another joining the list of ppl that want to say I told you so one day. And was not going by the last 10 games I'm going by 7 year sample size. Again I will take 45% fg 30% 3pt 18 pts 5 reb 2 ast any day of the week so if he "regresses" to that then I am still just happy as I a, now. Hell it means he got better 3 point shooting.

The "straw man" is what hasn't happened not what is happening. I am glad to see Jamal get such joy from your ever so thoughtful validation of his maybe, could, might argument

 

[Entity]

No. The only thing I'm arguing is it's too soon to make any conclusions about Sacto Rudy's play because it deviates from his career numbers, especially because he's a few years removed from his best seasons . Everything else is just an incorrect assumption on your part.

Exactly what is deviating? I know he probably won't continue shooting 48%. May argument is his career of 45% or so. I don't think that's as far fetched as you think. The guy is 27

 

[VF21]

Entity - It's going to be colder in January than December.
The_Jamal - It's going to be warmer in January than December.

Discuss.

(Just thought I'd give you guys something totally new and different to argue about. )

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I don't care. If he drops to 44% or stays at 48 or goes to 46. It's not that big of a deal.

Actually, all other things being kept equal (defense, rebounding, and importantly number of shots taken) it's a bigger deal than one might first imagine. You said above that the FG% differences we're talking about equate to one more missed FG - and thus two fewer points scored - every two games. Two fewer points in two games is an average of one fewer point per game. How big of a deal is one fewer point per game? Well, it turns out that you can model winning percentage based on point differential very well. And the short answer is that losing one point in your point differential (which would be the approximate effect of the FG% changes you're discussing) will cost your team about 2.4 wins per season. 2.4 wins is a pretty big deal in my book. Certainly not insignificant for a team fighting for a playoff spot.

 

[Entity]

Lol I just think he will be closer to 3 years ago than last year with us. That's it.

 

[Entity]

Actually, all other things being kept equal (defense, rebounding, and importantly number of shots taken) it's a bigger deal than one might first imagine. You said above that the FG% differences we're talking about equate to one more missed FG - and thus two fewer points scored - every two games. Two fewer points in two games is an average of one fewer point per game. How big of a deal is one fewer point per game? Well, it turns out that you can model winning percentage based on point differential very well. And the short answer is that losing one point in your point differential (which would be the approximate effect of the FG% changes you're discussing) will cost your team about 2.4 wins per season. 2.4 wins is a pretty big deal in my book. Certainly not insignificant for a team fighting for a playoff spot.

Thank you. He averages 19 now got 18 in Memphis at 45%. I mean do you really think his future in Sacramento is the 38% shooter from Toronto? Or closer to Memphis? Because the ever so small sample size that you clearly pointed out looks to be closer to Memphis.

 

[The_Jamal]

Lol I just think he will be closer to 3 years ago than last year with us. That's it.

Want to know the funny thing? I do as well. Toronto was such a horrid situation with an idiot coach, no post presence, and a duplicate talent in Derozan with him on the perimeter. But he also sucked in Memphis that year and wasn't great the year before in Memphis

But I also want to see him do it over a larger sample of games before really believing in him as a legitimate #2 on a potential title team.He's posting career best scoring efficiency while shooting less than he has since his rookie year. Will he be content doing with the less shots and continue to play within the offense? Not sure. He's been very good for 10 games. Let's see him do it for 50

 

[Entity]

If Rudy gay in these 10 games shot 44% I'd still be happy and this argument would be null. But then I guess it would be that he is going to drop to 40? The argument started when monkey stated it was a huge spike at 55 TS % when he had 2 years at 54% and severe at 52+. 55 not that great of a spike

 

[Entity]

Want to know the funny thing? I do as well. Toronto was such a horrid situation with an idiot coach, no post presence, and a duplicate talent in Derozan with him on the perimeter. But he also sucked in Memphis that year and wasn't great the year before in Memphis

But I also want to see him do it over a larger sample of games before really believing in him as a legitimate #2 on a potential title team. He's been very good for 10 games. Let's see him do it for 50

Basically you think we can do better? Hell boy show me the light. If we can get someone better than Gay I'm all for it. If we can get better than cousins I'm for it.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

No the straw an here is the argument of what might, could, maybe happen. My argument is what is happening. Your validation of a future that has not happened is no validation of the opposing argument it's just another joining the list of ppl that want to say I told you so one day. And was not going by the last 10 games I'm going by 7 year sample size. Again I will take 45% fg 30% 3pt 18 pts 5 reb 2 ast any day of the week so if he "regresses" to that then I am still just happy as I a, now. Hell it means he got better 3 point shooting.

The "straw man" is what hasn't happened not what is happening. I am glad to see Jamal get such joy from your ever so thoughtful validation of his maybe, could, might argument

I don't think you understand what a straw man argument is.

A straw man argument is so named because a straw man is something which is easy to knock over. The person making a straw man argument "builds" the straw man by inventing an argument or position that is easy to knock over, and then attributing that argument or position to his opponent despite the fact that the opponent has never presented such argument.

So, when you accuse HighFlyingMonkey and The_Jamal of "wanting Rudy Gay to fail" and "not liking winning", two positions that they have never taken, you are creating a straw man argument.

 

[The_Jamal]

If Rudy gay in these 10 games shot 44% I'd still be happy and this argument would be null. But then I guess it would be that he is going to drop to 40? The argument started when monkey stated it was a huge spike at 55 TS % when he had 2 years at 54% and severe at 52+. 55 not that great of a spike

It's a bigger spike than you believe, but that's fine.


And no, I don't think we can do better. You're not doing very well on your assumptions tonight. We're the Sacramento Kings. That's the reason I was really excited about the trade when we made it. If Gay could rebound to Memphis form, as he's done thus far, he can be a great all-around player and #2 scorer next to Cuz. I never thought he was as bad as he was in Toronto. Just a bad situation for him to be in. And we got him for essentially no pieces who were apart of the future of the team. What i've said this whole time is I don't believe Rudy will maintain what he's done so far because it exceeds what he's done the past 2 seasons and most of his career.

 

[rainmaker]

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Thank you. He averages 19 now got 18 in Memphis at 45%. I mean do you really think his future in Sacramento is the 38% shooter from Toronto? Or closer to Memphis? Because the ever so small sample size that you clearly pointed out looks to be closer to Memphis.

???

I never did any such thing.

 

[Entity]

So what I am getting is if a guy comes in and does really well in his first 10 games with us we should hold our optimism? It's to small of a sample size? So starting threads as brick did about top nba duo should be held for 50 games or so? Or else we face ridicule for being optimistic about it? That's an awesome place to hang out and talk about your favorite NBA team.

Further more on sample size. We get hundreds of ppl every year pawing over college freshmen that have only play 36 games or so against only a handful of future NBA players but that is sample size enough to wanting to lose enough games to get said player? Why are you to not coming down on them with the hammer of truth?

 

[Entity]

It's a bigger spike than you believe, but that's fine.


And no, I don't think we can do better. You're not doing very well on your assumptions tonight. We're the Sacramento Kings. That's the reason I was really excited about the trade when we made it. If Gay could rebound to Memphis form, as he's done thus far, he can be a great all-around player and #2 scorer next to Cuz. I never thought he was as bad as he was in Toronto. Just a bad situation for him to be in. And we got him for essentially no pieces who were apart of the future of the team. What i've said this whole time is I don't believe Rudy will maintain what he's done so far because it exceeds what he's done the past 2 seasons and most of his career.

Last two season yes he far exceeds it. Take out this year with us. And take out the last 2 years. I will take that guy as a legit # 2 option in the NBA. 18-19 pts at 45%

 

[Capt. Factorial]

So what I am getting is if a guy comes in and does really well in his first 10 games with us we should hold our optimism? It's to small of a sample size? So starting threads as brick did about top nba duo should be held for 50 games or so? Or else we face ridicule for being optimistic about it? That's an awesome place to hang out and talk about your favorite NBA team

Well, let's see:

Its perfectly legitimate to be optimistic about his performance thus far.

Sounds like you're allowed to be optimistic.

But I also want to see him do it over a larger sample of games before really believing in him as a legitimate #2 on a potential title team. ... He's been very good for 10 games. Let's see him do it for 50

As far as The_Jamal is concerned, he'd like to see it for 50 games. He never said we couldn't discuss it before then; that's just his own criterion.

So you may be getting that, but that's not actually what anybody has been saying.

Further more on sample size. We get hundreds of ppl every year pawing over college freshmen that have only play 36 games or so against only a handful of future NBA players but that is sample size enough to wanting to lose enough games to get said player? Why are you to not coming down on them with the hammer of truth?

Assuming you are talking to me, the main reason would be that I am not bringing down my hammer of truth on discussions about whether a particular sample size is reliable or not. I'm bringing down my hammer of truth on misrepresentations of other people's arguments.

 

[Entity]

Well, let's see:



Sounds like you're allowed to be optimistic.



As far as The_Jamal is concerned, he'd like to see it for 50 games. He never said we couldn't discuss it before then; that's just his own criterion.

So you may be getting that, but that's not actually what anybody has been saying.




Assuming you are talking to me, the main reason would be that I am not bringing down my hammer of truth on discussions about whether a particular sample size is reliable or not. I'm bringing down my hammer of truth on misrepresentations of other people's arguments.

So where is the hammer of truth behind me saying Rudy could be exactly want his career average states? Or is that to far fetched for you? I have been misrepresented as saying he will shoot 48% from now on? I stand behind his last two years are the exception not the rule? You disagree? If so give more reasoning than because of the last two years and not ignore the previous 6

 

[Tetsujin]

Want to know the funny thing? I do as well. Toronto was such a horrid situation with an idiot coach, no post presence, and a duplicate talent in Derozan with him on the perimeter. But he also sucked in Memphis that year and wasn't great the year before in Memphis

But I also want to see him do it over a larger sample of games before really believing in him as a legitimate #2 on a potential title team.He's posting career best scoring efficiency while shooting less than he has since his rookie year. Will he be content doing with the less shots and continue to play within the offense? Not sure. He's been very good for 10 games. Let's see him do it for 50

In all fairness to Rudy, he was still coming off of a major injury that ultimately removed him from the Grizzlies playoff roster the year before and convinced the Grizz upper brass they didn't need him. Of course since they've traded him, the Grizzlies have begun the slow tailspin into middling collection of role players and old guys.