jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Melo has been winning games the last 10 years..He has been to the playoffs every year of his career..Name the other NBA player who has accomplished that, I don't expect a response...When he played with an all star in Billups, he got to the WCF..Go figure..Efficient Kobe could not make the playoffs alone much less win in the playoffs by himself...Efficient Durant lost in the second round 4-1 to Memphis not playing with another all star...Efficient Wade couldn't make the playoffs without another star playing with him...Efficient/two way KG couldn't do it alone in Minny...Efficient Paul Pierce couldn't do it alone...The formula seems to be a few stars, but stay buried in advanced stats...

True, but you're wasting your time- the most frequent anti-Melo posters continuously move the goal posts whenever you make any points other than the fact that he is evil and sucks.

Melo got to the playoffs every year? Oh that was because of his team mates- just a coincidence that he's been to the playoffs every year.

Only playoff victories count- he sucks if you look at his playoff record. Oh wait a minute, CP3's playoff record is even worse? Erm.. the teams he has played on are worse... no, erm he's been to the playoffs fewer times than Melo, therefore technically the percentage of victories is higher.

Blah, blah, blah

I don't mind debating with people, and I know Melo has a lot of flaws, and a lot of criticisms are valid. Unfortunately all that gets lost in amongst the zealots and their obsession with being 'right'.

Passive aggressive? Why not address specific people and specific comments? This doesn't really add anything. I disagree with holfresh but respect that he's addressing specific points rather than just doing generic complaining.

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

smackeddog wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

I'll be honest, I don't know much about those kinds of stats you've posted and don't put much stock in those kinds of stats as a result! (consider me old school, though I'll admit it's based on my gut feeling than any in depth analysis), but I will say Paul George is no Scottie Pippen! Maybe if he keeps improving he can be compared to him, but he's one step back from becoming Trevor Ariza!

The player that killed us, and who people haven't really talked about that much on these boards since that series, was Lance Stephenson- was he playing above his level because he's from NY, or is he capable of playing that well all the time? We could have drafted him a few years ago, though maybe he wouldn't have developed as well due to off the court issues.

Hibbert was the primary reason we couldnt do anything in the paint.

George was the primary reason why Melo couldnt do much.

Exactly what did Lance do?

smackeddog wrote:

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

I'll be honest, I don't know much about those kinds of stats you've posted and don't put much stock in those kinds of stats as a result! (consider me old school, though I'll admit it's based on my gut feeling than any in depth analysis), but I will say Paul George is no Scottie Pippen! Maybe if he keeps improving he can be compared to him, but he's one step back from becoming Trevor Ariza!

The player that killed us, and who people haven't really talked about that much on these boards since that series, was Lance Stephenson- was he playing above his level because he's from NY, or is he capable of playing that well all the time? We could have drafted him a few years ago, though maybe he wouldn't have developed as well due to off the court issues.

I guess saying Lance killed us is a way to feel good without acknowledging who actually did.

Hibbert was the primary reason we couldnt do anything in the paint.

George was the primary reason why Melo couldnt do much.

Exactly what did Lance do?

I'm not acknowledgeing Lance Stephension as some sort of pro-Melo conspiracy! Ha! Like I said, I like Paul George, but his playoff performance has been exaggerated (he was awful in the Miami elimination game, and he didn't have a good series against us. Did have some great playoff games though)

Everyone knows Hibbert killed us (though part of that was ref assisted, thank goodness they suddenly realized that they had been calling the game wrongly all these years just in time for Hibbert in the playoffs!). George was not the reason Melo couldn't do much- Melo's torn shoulder was the reason Melo couldn't do much.

You don't remember Lance Stephenson in the Knick series? Do you not remember his 25pt (on 69% FG!) 10 reb performance in game 6?! His rebounding was great for a 6-5SG (I think over 8 a game), and his defense was good too. He's a good passer as well.

Even with Lance awesome rebounding even that was negated by a drunk on the court....JR had 10 as well.

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

I'll be honest, I don't know much about those kinds of stats you've posted and don't put much stock in those kinds of stats as a result! (consider me old school, though I'll admit it's based on my gut feeling than any in depth analysis), but I will say Paul George is no Scottie Pippen! Maybe if he keeps improving he can be compared to him, but he's one step back from becoming Trevor Ariza!

The player that killed us, and who people haven't really talked about that much on these boards since that series, was Lance Stephenson- was he playing above his level because he's from NY, or is he capable of playing that well all the time? We could have drafted him a few years ago, though maybe he wouldn't have developed as well due to off the court issues.

well of course he is no scottie pippen but last year was only his third year. yet his numbers are eerily similar at this juncture and he is trending to get better. we'll see if his new contract has an effect on his hunger to improve. something tells me it won't.

so far as the stats i use, relevant and current knowledge is power. you can't look at a player's FG% anymore unless he is a player who never takes 3-pointers. what you have to look at instead is the eFG% which takes into account the 3-point shot.

the other stats are a bit more involved, but look at it this way: the least selfish players are the orchestrating point guards and the best among them have a ratio of around .50 to 1 or even lower. this means that his usage rate is virtually half of his assist rate. the best non-point guards will have a ratio of around 1:1 but most will have a ratio of something more like 1.6 to 1. thanks to the triangle even a chucker like bryant has a career ratio of 1.4 to 1. jordan is a bit better at 1.37 to 1.

bird? a phenomenal 1 to 1 ratio, and that is for a small forward. lebron's is actually under 1 to 1. for non triangle offense players that is absolutely great.

durant is around 1.36 to 1 which is great for a small forward who also happens to score efficiently. and as i mentioned, paul george is closer to 1.2 to 1, which is truly admirable.

so... the higher the ratio is the more selfish the player is in terms of team cohesiveness, and the less likely ones teammates are going to have the necessary confidence to shoot the ball. why? because there will always be a question of if they will see the ball with any regularity or predictability.

both anthony and the italian have ratios of between 2 or 3 to 1. if they want to play a winning brand of basketball both need to bring their ratios down below 2 to 1, and in fact closer to 1.7 to 1.

notes: felton is at .70 to 1 and rose is at .82 to 1. this is no-man's land for putative point guards and so they will need another playmaker out there, playmaker for others that is.

I know I'm biased against advanced stats due to issues in my profession, but my issues with what you've just said is- where is the proof that Bird and Lebron etc were so great and effective BECAUSE their ratio's were 1 to 1? It's that old issue of correlation does not imply causation.

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

good point and I also mentioned before, while I would like to see him increase his FG% he doesn't take a lot of shots, I think he only about 12-13 shots per game in that knick series.... but what I noticed are the plays he made, both offense and defense were usually game impacting plays...

raven wrote:

Dagger wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

I'll be honest, I don't know much about those kinds of stats you've posted and don't put much stock in those kinds of stats as a result! (consider me old school, though I'll admit it's based on my gut feeling than any in depth analysis), but I will say Paul George is no Scottie Pippen! Maybe if he keeps improving he can be compared to him, but he's one step back from becoming Trevor Ariza!

The player that killed us, and who people haven't really talked about that much on these boards since that series, was Lance Stephenson- was he playing above his level because he's from NY, or is he capable of playing that well all the time? We could have drafted him a few years ago, though maybe he wouldn't have developed as well due to off the court issues.

well of course he is no scottie pippen but last year was only his third year. yet his numbers are eerily similar at this juncture and he is trending to get better. we'll see if his new contract has an effect on his hunger to improve. something tells me it won't.

so far as the stats i use, relevant and current knowledge is power. you can't look at a player's FG% anymore unless he is a player who never takes 3-pointers. what you have to look at instead is the eFG% which takes into account the 3-point shot.

the other stats are a bit more involved, but look at it this way: the least selfish players are the orchestrating point guards and the best among them have a ratio of around .50 to 1 or even lower. this means that his usage rate is virtually half of his assist rate. the best non-point guards will have a ratio of around 1:1 but most will have a ratio of something more like 1.6 to 1. thanks to the triangle even a chucker like bryant has a career ratio of 1.4 to 1. jordan is a bit better at 1.37 to 1.

bird? a phenomenal 1 to 1 ratio, and that is for a small forward. lebron's is actually under 1 to 1. for non triangle offense players that is absolutely great.

durant is around 1.36 to 1 which is great for a small forward who also happens to score efficiently. and as i mentioned, paul george is closer to 1.2 to 1, which is truly admirable.

so... the higher the ratio is the more selfish the player is in terms of team cohesiveness, and the less likely ones teammates are going to have the necessary confidence to shoot the ball. why? because there will always be a question of if they will see the ball with any regularity or predictability.

both anthony and the italian have ratios of between 2 or 3 to 1. if they want to play a winning brand of basketball both need to bring their ratios down below 2 to 1, and in fact closer to 1.7 to 1.

notes: felton is at .70 to 1 and rose is at .82 to 1. this is no-man's land for putative point guards and so they will need another playmaker out there, playmaker for others that is.

Assists is also the most subjective stat in basketball in that it is very easy for scorekeepers to manipulate assist numbers (see the disparity between Rondo's home and away assist totals). I do think the usage-assist rate is an interesting and useful stat, but you seem to be putting a ton of stock into something that is not recorded the same way unilaterally. Obviously catch-and-shoots, alley-oops and the like are no-brainers. But there are plenty of times a player will receive a nice pass, make a smooth dribble move around a defender to score and it could easily go either way. There is a lot of human judgment involved in these numbers, whereas other statistics like blocks, points, rebounds, and even steals (which is also sometimes subjective in determing which player to credit) are much more black and white.

Really? Is this all you have to answer to what he said?

And that Rondo comparison is flat out wrong.

smackeddog wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

dk7th wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jazz74 wrote:he was also injured during the playoffs while George was perfectly healthy.

Exactly. Unfortunately apparently 'injuries don't count', so if a player lost an arm they should still be performing at their best...

Paul George's playoff stats vs the Knicks:

19.5pts, 37% FG, 27% 3PT, 60%FT

I actually like Paul George, but he got way over-hyped in the playoffs. He had a bad series against us, and was wildly inconsistent vs Miami and Atlanta. Had some great games, but had some stinkers too. He's been anointed as though he's already proven he's a star, when to be honest I think he needs one more season to prove he can put it all together.

he also averaged 5 assists per game, 7 rebounds a game, 27% usage rate coupled with an assist rate of 24% for an elite level ratio of 1.12:1 for a small forward in terms of ball distribution and teamwork. i guess when you don't tell the full story it becomes expedient to your point of view. he is tracking to become a top 5 player in the nba, especially with his zeal for defending the position. and his numbers compare favorably to scottie pippen's numbers.

I'll be honest, I don't know much about those kinds of stats you've posted and don't put much stock in those kinds of stats as a result! (consider me old school, though I'll admit it's based on my gut feeling than any in depth analysis), but I will say Paul George is no Scottie Pippen! Maybe if he keeps improving he can be compared to him, but he's one step back from becoming Trevor Ariza!

The player that killed us, and who people haven't really talked about that much on these boards since that series, was Lance Stephenson- was he playing above his level because he's from NY, or is he capable of playing that well all the time? We could have drafted him a few years ago, though maybe he wouldn't have developed as well due to off the court issues.

well of course he is no scottie pippen but last year was only his third year. yet his numbers are eerily similar at this juncture and he is trending to get better. we'll see if his new contract has an effect on his hunger to improve. something tells me it won't.

so far as the stats i use, relevant and current knowledge is power. you can't look at a player's FG% anymore unless he is a player who never takes 3-pointers. what you have to look at instead is the eFG% which takes into account the 3-point shot.

the other stats are a bit more involved, but look at it this way: the least selfish players are the orchestrating point guards and the best among them have a ratio of around .50 to 1 or even lower. this means that his usage rate is virtually half of his assist rate. the best non-point guards will have a ratio of around 1:1 but most will have a ratio of something more like 1.6 to 1. thanks to the triangle even a chucker like bryant has a career ratio of 1.4 to 1. jordan is a bit better at 1.37 to 1.

bird? a phenomenal 1 to 1 ratio, and that is for a small forward. lebron's is actually under 1 to 1. for non triangle offense players that is absolutely great.

durant is around 1.36 to 1 which is great for a small forward who also happens to score efficiently. and as i mentioned, paul george is closer to 1.2 to 1, which is truly admirable.

so... the higher the ratio is the more selfish the player is in terms of team cohesiveness, and the less likely ones teammates are going to have the necessary confidence to shoot the ball. why? because there will always be a question of if they will see the ball with any regularity or predictability.

both anthony and the italian have ratios of between 2 or 3 to 1. if they want to play a winning brand of basketball both need to bring their ratios down below 2 to 1, and in fact closer to 1.7 to 1.

notes: felton is at .70 to 1 and rose is at .82 to 1. this is no-man's land for putative point guards and so they will need another playmaker out there, playmaker for others that is.

I know I'm biased against advanced stats due to issues in my profession, but my issues with what you've just said is- where is the proof that Bird and Lebron etc were so great and effective BECAUSE their ratio's were 1 to 1? It's that old issue of correlation does not imply causation.

i am using the usage and the assist rates and putting them in a ratio because the ratio represents the phenomenon of "cohesion" for an offense. insofar as there is no statistic for cohesion in and of itself, i have taken the liberty to look at a player's time with the ball in his hands and put that in relation to how often an assist is generated by the offense while he is on the floor.

so far as team cohesion i think you need to look at the top 3 ballhandlers

spurs have ginobili, parker, duncan for 26.9, assist rate 28.83--------> 0.93 to 1
celtics have rondo, pierce, garnett for 24.5, assist rate 29.6---------> 0.83 to 1
okc have just westbrook and durant for 31.3, assist rate 30.05 --------> 1.04 to 1
indy has west, hill, george, stephenson for 20.47, ast rate 19 --------> 1.07 to 1

nyk with felton, kidd, melo for 23.1, assist rate 19.63------> 1.17 to 1
nyk with felton, prig, melo for 19.6, assist rate 22.9-------> 0.86 to 1 so you see prigioni's value here

but

melo, felton, smith? disaster: 28.0, assist rate 18.53-------> 1.51 to 1

do you see what i mean? the cohesion is based on how well the top 3 ballhandlers share the basketball. if a team is cohesive that ratio looks to be closer to 1 to 1 or even less than 1 to 1, and the higher that ratio climbs above 1 to 1 the less cohesive the offense will end up being.

the less cohesive the less confidence the role players will have.

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Man, this thread... Once again a potentially interesting discussion, turns into a 'Melo sucks, the Knicks suck, every other player on every other team is fantastic'.

IDK, saying "Lance Stephenson killed us" was interesting.

No matter how untrue it was.

yea i read only for nuggets like that

Assists in basketball are comparable to errors in baseball. They're decent indicators of performance -- but they're also splashed with a healthy dose of subjectivity. Fluctuations in the way assists are recorded in different arenas, not to mention the league's bare-bones description of what an assist actually is, make them difficult to interpret.

http://hoopdata.com/blogengine/post/2013/01/06/Introducing-Arena-Adjusted-Assists.aspx

Introducing Arena-Adjusted Assists
by Blake Murphy 6. January 2013 16:17

When Jose Calderon was recently credit for an assist on this play (the first in the video), it had some questioning the validity of assists based on favorable home-court scoring. There’s no way, in any sense of the definition, that should have been scored an assist for Calderon.

The definition, per the NBA’s statistics manual according to this Wall Street Journal article, is as follows:

The NBA statistician's manual says an assist should be "credited to a player tossing the last pass leading directly to a field goal, only if the player scoring the goal responds by demonstrating immediate reaction to the basket."

Really, the validity question should come up for a handful of other reasons with respect to assists, but the idea of a home-advantage is an interesting one, and one that Ken Pomeroy had previously tried to tackle", albeit it was about college basketball rather than the NBA.

Question: Do scorers favor home teams when giving out assists?

According to one former Grizzlies stat-hand, it’s a lot of subjectivity and there’s room for bias from the scorer’s position. That said, that same WSJ article linked earlier had comment from the NBA that all stats are reviewed, so perhaps this is a problem that has been ironed out since the late-‘90s.

Nonetheless, the topic got me curious. In a discussion with my Beyond the Boxscore colleague Bryan Grosnick, he mentioned that he had actually pulled data on this matter before. He was kind enough to send it to me and share his findings with me.

I repeat: All of the credit for the research and pulling the stats belongs to Bryan. I greatly appreciate him sharing it with me to communicate via Hoopdata.

Bryan’s methodology for answering the question was as follows:

“I found a way to quantify it out, by comparing road and home assists to field goals made for each team, during each season from '06-'07 to '11-’12.”

That is, it compares a team’s at-home A% with its road A%. (Note that this method, using Assist Percentage, should strip out factors like pace and teams playing better at home, since it’s just A/FG. Not perfect, but it’s a start.)

So…

Question: Do scorers favor home teams when giving out assists?

It turns out that yes, scorers tend to favor the home team when it comes to giving out assists.

Answer: Scorers give home teams a boost of 2.7 percentage points, which makes for a 4.9% boost in Assist Percentage.

In other words, the Assist Percentage for all road teams in the sample was 56.1%, while for home teams it was 58.8% (a 2.7 percentage-point or 4.9% increase).

The data that Bryan gave me contains every team season in the sample, so there is a lot of room for me to build on this initial article with further analysis. My plan over the next few weeks is to re-create the assist leaderboards in each season using what I’m roughly calling an “Arena-Adjusted Assist” metric (AAA). Those types of articles should flow from this finding and this data set fairly easily, especially given the wide disparity between teams in particular seasons.

Some Interesting Findings *The top-five most favorable home scorers belong to: Nuggets, Clippers, Hawks, Lakers, Cavaliers *The five least favorable home scorers belong to: Heat, Suns, Kings, Knicks, Grizzlies *The single highest-inflated season was the 2008-09 Nuggets with a 13% inflation *The single most-deflated season was the 2006-07 Heat with a -8.7% deflation *LeBron’s quest to average a triple-double is actually hampered by Heat scorers *Steve Nash was probably undervalued in his MVP years

Please let me know via comment/email/twitter if you have any ideas for follow-up pieces based on this information. As mentioned, I plan to do a handful of articles based off of this data set in the next couple of weeks, and suggestions are always welcome. So stay tuned for more.

And a HUGE thanks to Bryan for all his hard work.

http://deadspin.com/5345287/the-confessions-of-an-nba-scorekeeper

Alex quickly found that a scorekeeper is given broad discretion over two categories: assists and blocks (steals and rebounds are also open to some interpretation, though not a lot). "In the NBA, an assist is a pass leading directly to a basket," he says. "That's inherently subjective. What does that really mean in practice? The definition is massively variable according to who you talk to. The Jazz guys were pretty open about their liberalities. ... John Stockton averaged 10 assists. Is that legit? It's legit because they entered it. If he's another guy, would he get 10? Probably not."

The bias is plain to see. Just look at the home-road splits. Last season, home teams leaguewide scored 101.58 points per game; road teams, 98.32. That's to be expected: Teams play better at home. What's surprising is that assists and blocks rise disproportionately for home teams — assists by nearly 8 percent, blocks by more than 15 percent. Last year's Nuggets averaged 25 assists at home, only 19.4 on the road. They recorded 7.3 blocks per game at home and just 4.7 outside Denver. (Hell, Chris Andersen swatted 117 shots in 38 games at home against only 58 blocks in 33 games on the road. It was as if he stepped into the Pepsi Center and suddenly turned into Larry Nance.) The reason? People like Alex.