Most people judge players or teams as being 'good' at passing if they are either creative with it and looking smooth, making the simple open pass frequently, or simply racking up a high number of assists.
Question is, how do you define if a TEAM is good at passing, or even a player?
Lets say a team on average for an 82 game season has less APG than an opposing team, does that mean they are weaker passing the basketball? Should it be a function of APG/Field Goals Made?
Should an ASSIST/TURNOVER ratio be a key indicator? What if a player simply has a nice ratio, but does not produce many assists? What if a team blows away another in total assists per game, or even assists per FGM -- but has a proprtionally worse turnover ratio? Are they both EVEN at passing?
What determines how good a player or team is at passing? Is it a combination of A/TO, simple APG and differential from their opposing teams A/TO and APG?
Or is it simple enough to watch the team and see their creativity and assume they might be the best, even though they might be turnover prone?
Any ideas or thoughts?
Question is, how do you define if a TEAM is good at passing, or even a player?
Lets say a team on average for an 82 game season has less APG than an opposing team, does that mean they are weaker passing the basketball? Should it be a function of APG/Field Goals Made?
Should an ASSIST/TURNOVER ratio be a key indicator? What if a player simply has a nice ratio, but does not produce many assists? What if a team blows away another in total assists per game, or even assists per FGM -- but has a proprtionally worse turnover ratio? Are they both EVEN at passing?
What determines how good a player or team is at passing? Is it a combination of A/TO, simple APG and differential from their opposing teams A/TO and APG?
Or is it simple enough to watch the team and see their creativity and assume they might be the best, even though they might be turnover prone?
Any ideas or thoughts?