King Baller
All-Star
I traded CWebb for Tom Gugliotta!!!!
Pace is Irrelevant, So What DOES Make Us Win?
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
King Baller
All-Star
I traded CWebb for Tom Gugliotta!!!!
Read about it here--> http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/18/s...sign-him-trade-him-webber-becomes-bullet.html
Anybody - anybody - who asks if one variable is correlated with another variable in the context of basketball will use Pearson's R. Anybody who does analytics will use Pearson's R. Every single team in the league employs at least one person whose job is to use Pearson's R among other tools. As an example, here is a Grantland article where Zach Lowe uses it (http://grantland.com/features/the-reliance-3-pointer-whether-not-hurting-nba/). This article happens to also relate to the three pointer, but I did not select it for that feature, but rather because it was the first article to come up in Google at a major website by a major journalist that mentioned a correlation coefficient in it.
Honestly, I'm flummoxed. You seem to want to challenge the validity of Pearson's R. Pearson's R is a standard technique. I can tell you ahead of time that challenging the validity of Pearson's R is not a winning strategy. No, I have no idea why you're asking.
P
Pace
Guest
You are the one throwing personal insults. I'm sorry if you disagree with my opinion and that "gets a rise out of you". People have explained why in a convoluted way, but ive never understood the logic. So that's my reasoning for that post if you're done writing essays about to stupid people who disagree with you on a basketball board are.
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
I traded CWebb for Tom Gugliotta!!!!
we could possibly see something like this happening w/ an idiotic FO we currently have.
King Baller
All-Star
Scary, Huh?
3pt shooting is indeed the analytic holy grail because it works and has been proven to work around dominant big men throughout NBA history. And there hasn't been a successful championship team that didn't excel at spacing the floor. It's the formula you look to surround your star players with (in our case, Rudy and Cuz.) And the exact reason WHY we need to do so and WHY it would lead to tremendous offensive success is because Cuz and Rudy are capable of dominating the paint while getting to the FT line and they're capable of making the pass to find the open shooter.
And there's also the fact that we don't shoot 3s in the first place. 27th in the NBA in 3pA rate. And Collison, Ben and Gay are all above 37% 3pt%. Williams is somehow close to average at 32%. With 3 above average floor spacers and a semi-average one in the rotation, it's not fair at all to say we don't have guys capable of doing it and that it's something we need to go away from to win. It's the exact opposite in fact.
Did you ever stop to think its maybe because we agree with each other (and basically every other media member, nba pro, etc)? And maybe you (and the few guys you are getting lumped with) are just wrong?
As a matter of fact, I wasn't. I am not interested in challenging Pearson's R. As I am not a statistician, I had never heard of Pearson's R. Statistics was not a required course for my CNS degree.
I asked because 1) I'm a cynic, 2) I'm an *******, and 3) I distrust the motives of everybody, and when you made that backhanded (albeit most probably unintentional) dig at b-r.com, and the availability of their metrics, I became suspicious of a formula that I'd never seen used by anybody. I would never question the accuracy of the numbers, coming from you but, knowing that you are a champion of the three-pointers, and being an ******* and a cynic (as previously stated), I absolutely would question whether you would create your own formula to support your narrative.
In other words, while I'm sure that the numbers themselves are accurate, according to the formula, they were, as near as I could tell, obtained using a totally arbitrary criteria, and I don't have enough trust in anybody's integrity that I would give them the benefit of the doubt that they wouldn't only present the numbers that support what they believe.
Again, we disagreed about pretty much everything until this bone-headed move. There were plenty of heated discussions, including ones between people now on the "same side" about things. This has united a lot of very smart, very knowledgeable but very different thinking fans together.
[Modding]
Stop accusing other posters of trolling. If you think someone is trolling, report the post.
Stop accusing other posters of trolling. If you think someone is trolling, report the post.
Swaze
Bench
I don't know how many more times I have to tell you, I thought firing Michael Malone was a mistake. The front office choosing style/pace over winning is also a mistake. The front office trying to force a style onto a roster and #1 player that doesn't fit is also a mistake. All very stupid and foolish mistakes from a very meddling owner and a GM that seems not interested in adapting to the players he has.
Yet because I make a post supporting some of the roster moves PDA has made or disagree with one of the Parrot Crew on another issue you lump me with those that you feel support the front office.
That makes your reading comprehension poor, not mine.
This isn't a reading comprehension issue. This may come as a shock to you but most of us don't pour through your post history marking off what areas you agree with us vs others. I honestly don't care about your particular stance on things and yes its possible I've unfairly generalized your position on some issues. Maybe it's just your overall style I find distasteful. Doesn't matter really. But I find it odd that you act so offended by being unfairly labeled just one post after claiming people that agree on issues are just parroting our lawyer leader.
Swaze
Bench
I'm not offended, words on an internet forum from a bunch of dudes (and a chick that likes to use the word dude) are not going to hurt my feelings.
You've lumped me in with the Front Office supporters on more than one post and I guess because you don't like my style (that's fine by the way). That's why I mentioned the Parrot thing earlier, it's gotten to the point here that if you disagree with Brick or one his crew on a myriad of individual issues, people assume you disagree on all of them. Are we not allowed to have opinions on individual issues or do we have to hit YES or NO to ALL?
I don't like PDA/Vivek firing Malone and especially hate the incredibly poor way they handled it. Yet if I post in a game thread that Rudy or DeMarcus is not giving good effort on the defensive end and look like they are mailing it in.......people just assume I'm on the side of the front office. If I say I like the Ben McLemore pick people assume that automatically means I support the firing of Malone too. That to me is stupid, I supported a move not all their moves. The inability of people here to separate agendas from individual issues is staggering.[/quote]
Last edited:
Swaze
Bench
The quote didn't work but I think your point is a fair one and I'll try to be more thoughtful in how I respond to your posts.
Even when they're stupid.
That's fine I don't mind you calling a spade a spade......unless of course it's a diamond!
It was certainly not intended to be a backhanded dig at b-r.com. They are my go-to website for stats and I esteem them highly.
I just want to go over what I said about b-r.com in that post to explain why it was not intended to be a dig in any way.
When I was doing this, I wanted to compile this data relatively quickly. The easiest way I know to do this is to go to their "season summary" pages. In fact, six of the seven stats that I checked for a correlation with MOV (and MOV itself) are all found on the Miscellaneous Stats table. Fortunately these six stats all lined up very closely to the stats that Brick was interested in. While they are not necessarily the exact numbers he was using (for instance, free throw rate as opposed to total free throws) I think they are in general better than raw stats for the kind of question I was asking anyway. But the fact that they are in table format is the key, because I could simply copy and paste five times (the entire table, once for each year) and get 150 data points quite quickly. The same page does have winning percentage on it, but it is not in a tabular format nor is it arranged by team in a logical order (for instance, I sorted the table alphabetically by team before copying so that it would line up with the other table which I also copy-pasted to get AST and FGM numbers, which I will mention below). This means that in order to get winning percentage, which incidentally I would prefer to MOV, I did not see any option other than making 150 individual hand entries. (Perhaps there is another page that I have missed that would allow me to get these values in a tabular format.) I did not want to make 150 hand entries, and I know from previous experience that MOV is very strongly correlated with winning percentage, and since that was in the table, I used that as a proxy.
So I simply wanted to point out why it was that I was using a proxy instead of the number that would seem to be the preferred number (winning percentage). But I didn't mean to imply that b-r.com is bad or that winning %age is not available, just that it's not one of the columns in the easy cut-and-paste table.
Again, this was part of an explanation as to why I didn't use assist rate (that is, assists per possession, as I used similar rate stats for all of the other comparisons) and instead used a different value of AST/FGM. I didn't mean to dig b-r.com by saying that, just to explain that as a team stat an assist rate stat to complement my other comparisons was unavailable. In fact, it looks like b-r.com does not calculate what I would consider to be a true assist rate (assists per team possession) at all, presumably because they prefer the Pomeroy Assist Rate (which they call AST%) for individual stats and AST% is not particularly amenable to team stats.
But anyway, no dig intended at b-r.com. They are indispensable.
Swaze, one thing I can tell you from my experience is that most of the time people respond to the content within the post more than they respond to individual posters. If people take issue with one thing that you have to say that doesn't mean they are branding you as "the enemy" and no longer listen to anything else you say. Maybe one or two people act like that, but the vast majority just continue the discussion. As sballer pointed out, many of the people who agree that firing Coach Malone was a mistake have disagreed in the past over all sorts of issues, sometimes heatedly so. The whole reason this message board even exists is to give a place for these types of discussions. It's not personal, it's basketball.
Swaze
Bench
Agreed with all of the latter part of your post. I do however think that often times people look for one thing in a post that they dislike and then they frame an entire argument around that single thing. Something a lawyer would do quite well.
PDA and Vivek have definitely managed to once again re-unite the fan base much like the Maloofs did when they kept trying to move the team.
Of the last few years there is no question in my mind though that there are a couple posters here who have essentially a crew that waits for them to come up with an opinion and then the crew comes running with all of the support posts. Case in point last Spring/Summer with I.T. Most of the fan base was very positive with Thomas but once the powers-at-be determined he was on their dislike list this forum became the Anti Isaiah Thomas. The vast majority of the Kings fan base liked Isaiah but you would not know it by coming here. It practically became a hate forum for him last spring into Summer. By the way I was for the Kings letting Thomas go and getting Collison instead I just found the amount of hate and insults towards on him on this forum to be odd. Forum used to have a policy against trashing players and yet mysteriously that went by the wayside for Thomas.
Year before it was the same thing in the opposite direction with Tyreke. Sample people every time all saying the same thing and trying to bully people who disagree. If you said anything bad about Tyreke you were called a troll and threatened to be banned. I know because it happened to me when I said Tyreke was a dime-a-dozen type player.......as if that's crossing the line and yet calling people gerbil, midget, or pizza-boy is somehow classier.
twslam07
All-Star
Again, the lack of reading comprehension is astounding...
You can disagree with the large majority of Kings Fans opinions on the Malone firing. It doesn't matter that you are in one of the smallest minorities I've come to see on this board. You have a right to disagree, and it's one of the things that makes this forum so great. It's the way you go about it that is the issue. Many people have had different views than me on this forum, but they tend to back it up with logic and reasoning. If you're going to be in this small minority of people, you better be ready to support what you say; otherwise, you're going to see a lot of hammers come down on you.
Now do you have to change your ways? No. You can continue down this path and flirt with the troll line knowing that your opinion will never be taken seriously here. It's your right to have that legacy if you so choose!
KingsFanGER
Starter
SO we come to the conclusion, that defense matters but an efficient offense matters too.
Question...does pace has anything to do with the ability to play good defense?
We are all talking offense here all the time, argueing about purported run&gun, junkball, cherrypicking, NBA 3.0...
But we all know, that we can win despite the changes on the offensive end as long as we play defense.
This is the true and only misconception of the Malone firing - the assumption that the team would play the same kind of defense despite the coaching change.
And this is all on PDA and the rest of the FO.
But we showed signs in the games against the Thunder and Cavs, that we can still play some solid D even with the new approach. So there may be hope.
Question...does pace has anything to do with the ability to play good defense?
We are all talking offense here all the time, argueing about purported run&gun, junkball, cherrypicking, NBA 3.0...
But we all know, that we can win despite the changes on the offensive end as long as we play defense.
This is the true and only misconception of the Malone firing - the assumption that the team would play the same kind of defense despite the coaching change.
And this is all on PDA and the rest of the FO.
But we showed signs in the games against the Thunder and Cavs, that we can still play some solid D even with the new approach. So there may be hope.
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
it is what it is. i called em newbs last year and got some hate for it. we'll see how it goes throughout cousins contract. we know we can get at least 3 1st round picks for cousins if they decide to trade him. that will give them 3 new jazz band players to fulfill their revolutionary 3.0 position-less fantasy.
If we really get to it though, what's been different about the last two wins, relative to when Malone was coaching?
Rotations have been tighter for sure, but let's not act like Corbin reinvented the wheel. A re-commitment to both individual and team defense has them playing winning ball.
Other than that, I'm not seeing the wins reflective of a new style.
Rotations have been tighter for sure, but let's not act like Corbin reinvented the wheel. A re-commitment to both individual and team defense has them playing winning ball.
Other than that, I'm not seeing the wins reflective of a new style.
King Baller
All-Star
Was I the only one watching the game the other night urging the Kings to slow it down as the third quarter came to a close? Yes they were up by 19, but the Cavs hit a couple of 3's and the Kings were still playing too fast IMO. I do like the game slowed down when a team has a commanding lead and there is only one quarter left.
King Baller
All-Star
I hope we have not just given them an idea. Those picks could equal very little, just as it did back in the day for the GSW. Cousins is a very special talent.
KingsFanGER
Starter
Well I agree. Corbin hasn't changed that much and PDA wanted Corbin to slow down even more. This is why I don't understand all this uproar about NBA 3.0, run&gun, junkball, pace.
It's precisely because those are the buzzwords being used at the FO at every given opportunity, even at Malone's firing and subsequent interviews. I mean, If your boss was canned for employing a certain style, and his boss said things like "pace, style, etc." as a reason, you'd try to do the opposite as well.
Sometimes I think they're doing it just to sound smart, but it's actually given the opposite effect. I wonder how much feedback they really got from PDA's community forum, and if any of that resulted in the change we're seeing, or if it's merely coincidence.
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
we haven't given them any ideas. they particularly love 2nd round picks and trade exceptions. thats a step up in evolution for them if they start going for 1st round picks.
they wanna play like GSW but GSW does not have a dominant big man like cousins. don't blame their strategy bc they are playing the cards they are dealt which is shooting (splash bros).
KingsFanGER
Starter
Sounds belittling towards our Fo to me. I know it's pretty popular to think that these guys just don't know what they are doing and don't know much about basketball and that some of the more vocal users around here would do a better job as a Gm, but that's something that takes criticism a bit too far for me.
I don't expect an NBA franchise to model their playstyle after the opinions heard during a fan forum.
Swaze
Bench
Based on the way things have been going maybe they should. Forget NBA 3.0 let's skip straight ahead to NBA 4.0 where the GM Position is open sourced from the fan forums. Vivek is just crazy enough to try it one day...
Similar threads
