Oh, it keeps on getting better. How old are you?
As an aside, I assume you are referring to the same Rod Thorn who apparently had a panic attack when it came time to actually sign SAR and blew up the deal right?
You know the amusing thing is that Geoff actually MAY agree with me. He likes his PFs to have SF skills. This is the logical extension of being mroe attached to a system than to winning. You just keep on plugging in lesser talented players into the roles vacated by your former stars. Reef's got the offense to play PF for us because, you guessed it, he plays a lot like a SF. Unfortunately there have been maybe two guys, Webb and KG, capable of running our system from PF and still being POWER forwards capable of rebounding, blocking shots, and generally impersonating a big man.
As an aside, I assume you are referring to the same Rod Thorn who apparently had a panic attack when it came time to actually sign SAR and blew up the deal right?
You know the amusing thing is that Geoff actually MAY agree with me. He likes his PFs to have SF skills. This is the logical extension of being mroe attached to a system than to winning. You just keep on plugging in lesser talented players into the roles vacated by your former stars. Reef's got the offense to play PF for us because, you guessed it, he plays a lot like a SF. Unfortunately there have been maybe two guys, Webb and KG, capable of running our system from PF and still being POWER forwards capable of rebounding, blocking shots, and generally impersonating a big man.
Last edited:
You guys should give it a rest, the thread will be ruined with your bickering.
I agree with the Bricklayer's notion that certain aspects of basketball cannot be modelled well enough with statistics, unlike, say, Baseball. This goes for a lot of sports actually; especially any team sport.
Having said that, they're making advances in that department. The piece that Rosenbaum wrote is just another example of that. He says it himself -- it's not meant to be "the list the be all and end all", certainly as there still are some strange results, but it does reflect things better than anything else I've seen so far. It also reflects the view of SAF and Peja being soft.
48 min stats are useful. About Nbrans's argument -- somebody putting up good stats per 48min, but who is only playing 10 minutes, might not sustain this level is he were to play longer: Intuitively, that's a good argument. However, some people have studied this a bit more, and it actually seems these 48min stats are actually very indicative of the "true stats" (which is admittedly, very vague). For instance, with the 48mins, it was shown that a few years ago, Randolph and Redd were much more useful and deserved much more playing time than they had in '02/'03. When they *did* play that much more, their 48min stats seem to be around the same level. Especially for that purpose, it's a very useful stat.
As for Abdur-Rahim's rebounding qualities, his rebound-rate (won't bore you with why I think that is a much better measure) is pretty mediocre, and as Brick said, doesn't rate highly with the other PFs. No, he's not a bad player, and no, it wasn't necessarily a bad pickup other than being a good temporary pickup, but he's not a great rebounder by any means.
I agree with the Bricklayer's notion that certain aspects of basketball cannot be modelled well enough with statistics, unlike, say, Baseball. This goes for a lot of sports actually; especially any team sport.
Having said that, they're making advances in that department. The piece that Rosenbaum wrote is just another example of that. He says it himself -- it's not meant to be "the list the be all and end all", certainly as there still are some strange results, but it does reflect things better than anything else I've seen so far. It also reflects the view of SAF and Peja being soft.
48 min stats are useful. About Nbrans's argument -- somebody putting up good stats per 48min, but who is only playing 10 minutes, might not sustain this level is he were to play longer: Intuitively, that's a good argument. However, some people have studied this a bit more, and it actually seems these 48min stats are actually very indicative of the "true stats" (which is admittedly, very vague). For instance, with the 48mins, it was shown that a few years ago, Randolph and Redd were much more useful and deserved much more playing time than they had in '02/'03. When they *did* play that much more, their 48min stats seem to be around the same level. Especially for that purpose, it's a very useful stat.
As for Abdur-Rahim's rebounding qualities, his rebound-rate (won't bore you with why I think that is a much better measure) is pretty mediocre, and as Brick said, doesn't rate highly with the other PFs. No, he's not a bad player, and no, it wasn't necessarily a bad pickup other than being a good temporary pickup, but he's not a great rebounder by any means.
Last edited:
Perhaps The Freak can give more insight on the context of the update. As far as Kenny's desire to stay a starter or at least in the active rotation, is that from someone who has first hand knowledge of his desires or is it just an assumption on the speakers part? If he will be content to be a least a part of the active rotation puts his status in a different catagory. As fans, we have made asssumptions of his attittude from some of his answers to a question, and the indication of his desires in the notes is not entirely in line with those assumptions.
Cost of contract aside, he could be a "super" 6th man backing up both the PF and SF position.
Cost of contract aside, he could be a "super" 6th man backing up both the PF and SF position.
If by SF skills you mean that they're skilled at passing and hitting a mid-range jump shot then yes, but those are hardly skills that are limited to SFs. But by any other measure I'd say that Geoff Petrie likes his power forwards to be a low post presence. Just look at his draft history -- he's the guy who drafted Brian Grant and Corliss Williamson. Except for Kenny Thomas who is more of a jump shooter and slasher, the Kings have always had a post presence. Yeah, they have to be able to pass, which narrows down the field considerably, but priority #1 for Petrie PFs is scoring in the paint. Abdur-Rahim fits the mold as a PF.
Last edited:
This is an interesting philosophical discussion, and I didn't mean to suggest that per-48 minutes don't have their place. I just think in the particular context of assessing someone who is already playing 40 minutes a night, per-48 minute stats are less interesting because you're already seeing what that person is doing with playing time. They're much more useful in terms of "what if Player X had more playing time," which you illustrate with the very good Randolph and Redd points.
So yeah, Abdur-Rahim isn't a great rebounder, nor is he a poor rebounder, but per-48 stats aren't really needed to show that. As Bricklayer pointed out elsewhere, among active power forwards his per-game numbers are in the middle.
So yeah, Abdur-Rahim isn't a great rebounder, nor is he a poor rebounder, but per-48 stats aren't really needed to show that. As Bricklayer pointed out elsewhere, among active power forwards his per-game numbers are in the middle.
Last edited:
I like this Nbrans and Brick argument. They are both very adament to their points but the only really difference is nbrans is more level-headed and Brick is hard-headed which is not exactly a bad trait. However to say that you held your head high after the Nick Anderson and Mateen aquisitions as if you are god is very very lame.
OK guys, I don't want to enter the SAR argument but here are some SAR STATS (nothing less, nothing more) from 04-05 season, after Zack Randolph got injured. In these games, SAR was the starting PF for Blazers.
I only put the games I consider interesting (IMHO).
Unfortunately, no Duncan/KG during this period.
03/05/05 vs Phoenix :
25 pts (11/16), 13 reb, 1 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 0 to, 35 minutes
Marion : 26 pts 9 reb
Amare : 20 pts 3 reb
03/07/05 vs Denver :
15 pts (7/12), 5 reb, 5 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 2 to, 34 minutes
Kenyon Martin : 7 pts, 2 reb 23 minutes
03/09/05 vs Chicago :
22 pts (8/14), 10 reb, 2 ast, 0 st, 1 bs, 3 to, 35 minutes
Chandler : 9 pts, 13 reb 31 minutes
03/17/05 vs Dallas :
20 pts (6/18), 5 reb, 4 ast, 1 st, 1 bs, 5 to, 46 minutes
Nowitzki : 15 pts, 9 reb 36 minutes
03/19/05 vs Orlando :
13 pts (4/12), 7 reb, 2 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 3 to, 41 minutes
Howard : 4 pts 12 reb 33 minutes
03/21/05 vs L.A. Clippers :
23 pts (7/18), 14 reb, 2 ast, 2 st, 0 bs, 0 to, 39 minutes
Brand : 22 pts 6 reb 6 bs 37 minutes
03/24/05 vs Seattle :
16 pts (5/13), 5 reb, 2 ast, 2 st, 3 bs, 0 to, 33 minutes
Evans : 3 pts 9 reb 22 minutes
04/01/05 vs Seattle :
21 pts (7/14), 6 reb, 4 ast, 1 st, 0 bs, 1 to, 41 minutes
Evans : 5 pts 13 reb 29 minutes
04/02/05 vs Denver :
20 pts (9/23), 8 reb, 7 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 2 to, 48 minutes
Nenê : 14 pts 6 reb 33 minutes
04/19/05 vs Denver :
9 pts (4/10), 1 reb, 1 ast, 1 st, 0 bs, 1 to, 14 minutes
Nenê : 21 pts 13 reb 33 minutes
I only put the games I consider interesting (IMHO).
Unfortunately, no Duncan/KG during this period.
03/05/05 vs Phoenix :
25 pts (11/16), 13 reb, 1 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 0 to, 35 minutes
Marion : 26 pts 9 reb
Amare : 20 pts 3 reb
03/07/05 vs Denver :
15 pts (7/12), 5 reb, 5 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 2 to, 34 minutes
Kenyon Martin : 7 pts, 2 reb 23 minutes
03/09/05 vs Chicago :
22 pts (8/14), 10 reb, 2 ast, 0 st, 1 bs, 3 to, 35 minutes
Chandler : 9 pts, 13 reb 31 minutes
03/17/05 vs Dallas :
20 pts (6/18), 5 reb, 4 ast, 1 st, 1 bs, 5 to, 46 minutes
Nowitzki : 15 pts, 9 reb 36 minutes
03/19/05 vs Orlando :
13 pts (4/12), 7 reb, 2 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 3 to, 41 minutes
Howard : 4 pts 12 reb 33 minutes
03/21/05 vs L.A. Clippers :
23 pts (7/18), 14 reb, 2 ast, 2 st, 0 bs, 0 to, 39 minutes
Brand : 22 pts 6 reb 6 bs 37 minutes
03/24/05 vs Seattle :
16 pts (5/13), 5 reb, 2 ast, 2 st, 3 bs, 0 to, 33 minutes
Evans : 3 pts 9 reb 22 minutes
04/01/05 vs Seattle :
21 pts (7/14), 6 reb, 4 ast, 1 st, 0 bs, 1 to, 41 minutes
Evans : 5 pts 13 reb 29 minutes
04/02/05 vs Denver :
20 pts (9/23), 8 reb, 7 ast, 0 st, 0 bs, 2 to, 48 minutes
Nenê : 14 pts 6 reb 33 minutes
04/19/05 vs Denver :
9 pts (4/10), 1 reb, 1 ast, 1 st, 0 bs, 1 to, 14 minutes
Nenê : 21 pts 13 reb 33 minutes
Since I am neck deep in the SAR argument, I will say that it's very, very interesting that he oustscored almost every PF he faced. It shows he's very capable both offensively and defensively.
However, there's plenty of fodder for SAR haters -- the Blazers lost every single one of these games. I personally blame the incredibly weak lineup they were using at the time: Telfair, Stoudamire (as a 5'10" shooting guard!!!), Miles, SAR, Pryzbilla, with Anderson, Outlaw, Victor "take-a" Khryapa and Theo Ratliff's injured knees off the bench). But I'll admit that makes me just a tad nervous.
However, there's plenty of fodder for SAR haters -- the Blazers lost every single one of these games. I personally blame the incredibly weak lineup they were using at the time: Telfair, Stoudamire (as a 5'10" shooting guard!!!), Miles, SAR, Pryzbilla, with Anderson, Outlaw, Victor "take-a" Khryapa and Theo Ratliff's injured knees off the bench). But I'll admit that makes me just a tad nervous.
Last edited:
Jkbiker said:
Lets see this was 8pm Tues, so less than 12 hours left!!!!
The clock is ticking!!!
Suprised there was not any new news in the Bee today
Hmmmm wonder if the Maloofs are having the same problem insuring that knee
(Joe on the phone)
Hello? Prudential?
The clock is ticking!!!
Suprised there was not any new news in the Bee today
Hmmmm wonder if the Maloofs are having the same problem insuring that knee
(Joe on the phone)
Hello? Prudential?
Be interesting to watch, but since the only real "young talent" we have at the moment is Kevin and Cisco, think the answer to that may well depend on what our plans are for Bonzi. Obviously if Bonzi stays, then one of Kevin or Cisco seems likely to go as we don't need TWO young backup OGs, and they actually will get in eahc other's way this year. But I could also see us keeping both kids this year in anticipation of Bonzi's free agency next year...and I have very mixed feelings about that. I like them as insurance in case Bonzi blows up on us and one or the other of them reallys hows potential. But I'd hate to see Bonzi work out and still be let go as a financial decision to max out Peja or whatnot and then plug a kid in just because he's cheap. Still, either way, it seems unlikely we would move BOTH of them. And with Cisco as a new draft pick I would say Kevin is the only guy with any real chance of being moved, and then probably just as sweetner to make a larger deal happen.
Last edited:
Maybe it is slightly less interesting, because when you're comparing starters, the playtime is very similar to each other. But for ranking rebounders, it's still a better measure to use -- because with the use of nominal values, you might leave out some up-and-coming players, or bench players like Reggie Evans and Dan Gadzuric. They are players who suck at a lot of things, and therefore are not playing as many minutes, but they truly excel at rebounding.
Their rebound rates (which is defined as the percentage of rebounds a players gets off the opponents' missed shots, during the time that a player was in the game) were a league-leading 23.9 and 22.2 respectively, whereas Shareef's number was around 12.1. It is above-average by NBA standards, but when you filter the list to just PF, SF or both (whatever you like), it is likely to be in the 3rd quartile.
Btw, Rosenbaum's list was pretty good, I thought. It was nice to see that Jason Hart was at the top in the PG list, even though that ultimately might have very little impact on our defense as a whole.
Their rebound rates (which is defined as the percentage of rebounds a players gets off the opponents' missed shots, during the time that a player was in the game) were a league-leading 23.9 and 22.2 respectively, whereas Shareef's number was around 12.1. It is above-average by NBA standards, but when you filter the list to just PF, SF or both (whatever you like), it is likely to be in the 3rd quartile.
Btw, Rosenbaum's list was pretty good, I thought. It was nice to see that Jason Hart was at the top in the PG list, even though that ultimately might have very little impact on our defense as a whole.
I didn't hear Koz say it, but that's because I usually don't listen to his show. But, I don't doubt the report, because Grant ranted about it yesterday (the day after Koz's show) that Koz's report was not a "new" news story. Grant had Aaron Goodwin- Rahim's agent- on his show the same day, which airs right before Koz's, and Goodwin said that both sides were “very interested”. Grant said, in typical hothead, angry fashion, that there was no story, or news to report. Basically chastising Koz's report and said it was "EMBARRASSING!!!".
That’s the drama out of Sacramento.
I caught the last 40 minutes of Koz’s show yesterday, and they were talking about the Monarchs (They’re going to ease Demaya back into the lineup). No mention of Shareef.
That’s the drama out of Sacramento.
I caught the last 40 minutes of Koz’s show yesterday, and they were talking about the Monarchs (They’re going to ease Demaya back into the lineup). No mention of Shareef.
Very good points on all the rebounding things. You're right that rebounding percentage is a great way to assess how good of a rebounder someone is. But I still stand by SAR's per-game rebounding numbers. I'm mostly of the mind that if someone like Reggie Evans can't stay in the game for more than 20 minutes despite his good rebounding skills then I'm not very concerned with the theoretical rebounds he could pull down. But that's just me, I know there's a place for those stats.
As far as Rosenbaum's list goes, I found it to pretty terrible. Of course there are usual suspects at the top of the list, but there are some pretty glaring errors, including Dirk Nowitzki and Vince Carter in the top 10 at their position, which is a serious joke. Meanwhile, Matt Harpring is ranked DEAD LAST at the small forward position and he's one of the best defending SFs in the league!
As far as Rosenbaum's list goes, I found it to pretty terrible. Of course there are usual suspects at the top of the list, but there are some pretty glaring errors, including Dirk Nowitzki and Vince Carter in the top 10 at their position, which is a serious joke. Meanwhile, Matt Harpring is ranked DEAD LAST at the small forward position and he's one of the best defending SFs in the league!
Last edited:
Don't mean to sidetrack this some more, but since you asked -- check the last column. For some reason the Avg number (which was used to rank them) accounts for two seasons Nocioni didn't play in the league so his score of ..... -4.5 (worst in the league last year) became averaged over three seasons like this: 0+0+(-4.5)/3 = -1.5. I don't know why he did it that way (maybe to account for the small sample size problem of rookie players?) but that seems to be what happened.
Anyway, carry on.
Anyway, carry on.
Good point about Evans not being good enough, but as a backup guy, he seems like a great choice. People ask why Seattle improved so much last season, when their roster pretty much unchanged. It is hard to point the success to just one thing. But the huge improvements in rebounding from Evans, Fortson, Collison and Potapenko was definitely a crucial factor.
My point wasn't about the whole package, just to maintain that saying a guy averages 8 rebounds per game means little in itself without some better way of comparing players.
Interestingly, Kenny Thomas has a rebound rate of 13.9. Make of that what you will. The leaders for the Kings last season were: Ostertag (16.8), Skinner (16.6) and Miller (13.9). And sadly enough, Peja (6.3) almost gets bested by Bibby (6.0).
There are some glaring errors in Rosenbaum's list. He even points them out himself. The thing is, we will probably never find something "objective" (creating a method to rate players can hardly be classified as such). But at some point there will be a method which produces reasonable results.
I just view it as a work in process. I probably look at it differently as well, considering my background in stats. It is very hard to be innovative, and the work he's done is just another step forward, despite being imperfect.
The worst part about it, is that unlike measuring rebound-rates (which is very reasonable already, though it also has limitations. But I digress here), defense is an intangible. How the hell do you measure defense? How do you measure team play, or team chemistry? They're just too vague to translate them to numbers.
My point wasn't about the whole package, just to maintain that saying a guy averages 8 rebounds per game means little in itself without some better way of comparing players.
Interestingly, Kenny Thomas has a rebound rate of 13.9. Make of that what you will. The leaders for the Kings last season were: Ostertag (16.8), Skinner (16.6) and Miller (13.9). And sadly enough, Peja (6.3) almost gets bested by Bibby (6.0).
There are some glaring errors in Rosenbaum's list. He even points them out himself. The thing is, we will probably never find something "objective" (creating a method to rate players can hardly be classified as such). But at some point there will be a method which produces reasonable results.
I just view it as a work in process. I probably look at it differently as well, considering my background in stats. It is very hard to be innovative, and the work he's done is just another step forward, despite being imperfect.
The worst part about it, is that unlike measuring rebound-rates (which is very reasonable already, though it also has limitations. But I digress here), defense is an intangible. How the hell do you measure defense? How do you measure team play, or team chemistry? They're just too vague to translate them to numbers.
Last edited:
Just to throw my two cents into the SAR debate...I agree with Brick that SAR is more naturally a small forward who uses his size and post skills to abuse smaller forwards and put up gaudy numbers. His best days were clearly at SF, and we have all become a little to obsessed with thinking that an SF has to be a deadeye shooter. Some of the very good SFs in the games were never thought of as much of an outside shooter (Pippen and Grant Hill come to mind as the ultimate example that the 3 doesn't have to shoot, but some very servicable 3s also had/have little outside shot: Bowen, Prince, Marion- when he plays 3, Artest, SAR, Anthony Mason, Antawn Jamison, etc...)
However, I do not think SAR is a bad pickup, in fact he is a very good pickup, and at this point and time, is the best possible pickup that the Kings could REASONABLY acquire. In fact, just a few weeks ago there was a lot of talk on this board about how the Kings were bleeding talent and they were not getting anything back for the players who departed (Mobley, worry that Evans would sign elsewhere without compensation, loss of Jim Jackson and Vlade for nothing, Webber for next to nothing etc...). Well, getting SAR is the anti-talent bleed. The Kings would pick up a 19/9 SF/PF without losing a single player. This is a MAJOR TALENT UPGRADE for a team that has lost a ton of talent from its glory days a few years back.
Essentially, SAR gives the Kings a very desirable piece (reportedly pursued by about a dozen teams this summer) with a low contract that can be moved if Petrie desires down the road, and THAT is the point. I don't think anyone can make the argument that SAR joining this team makes the Kings a contender- he is more a stopgap acquisition (stopping the talent bleed and giving the Kings more moveable quality pieces for the future- whether that be later this summer, during the season, or next offseason).
I also think this might be some realization by Geoff that he vastly overestimated the flexibility and desire of NBA teams to acquire Thomas, Skinner, and Corliss. I think he clearly planned to move these guys, and may still, but they are just as unmoveable as Webber for various reasons. I think Geoff greatly overestimated the fact that he could move them, and trying to pickup SAR is both a realization that KT is not a starting PF, and that the Kings need badly to acquire more talent and more moveable pieces to build a championship squad.
However, I do not think SAR is a bad pickup, in fact he is a very good pickup, and at this point and time, is the best possible pickup that the Kings could REASONABLY acquire. In fact, just a few weeks ago there was a lot of talk on this board about how the Kings were bleeding talent and they were not getting anything back for the players who departed (Mobley, worry that Evans would sign elsewhere without compensation, loss of Jim Jackson and Vlade for nothing, Webber for next to nothing etc...). Well, getting SAR is the anti-talent bleed. The Kings would pick up a 19/9 SF/PF without losing a single player. This is a MAJOR TALENT UPGRADE for a team that has lost a ton of talent from its glory days a few years back.
Essentially, SAR gives the Kings a very desirable piece (reportedly pursued by about a dozen teams this summer) with a low contract that can be moved if Petrie desires down the road, and THAT is the point. I don't think anyone can make the argument that SAR joining this team makes the Kings a contender- he is more a stopgap acquisition (stopping the talent bleed and giving the Kings more moveable quality pieces for the future- whether that be later this summer, during the season, or next offseason).
I also think this might be some realization by Geoff that he vastly overestimated the flexibility and desire of NBA teams to acquire Thomas, Skinner, and Corliss. I think he clearly planned to move these guys, and may still, but they are just as unmoveable as Webber for various reasons. I think Geoff greatly overestimated the fact that he could move them, and trying to pickup SAR is both a realization that KT is not a starting PF, and that the Kings need badly to acquire more talent and more moveable pieces to build a championship squad.