[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

NBA Draft Lotto Thread - May 19 - 2009
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 12 of 16 « First‹ Previous 10  11  12  13  14 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
5/19/2009  11:04 PM
Posted by Andrew:

It was mentioned on air that it was the machine that was used. The balls in the demo were not used. The real balls were kept by the auditors.


Auditors what a scam.
AUTOADVERT
ramtour420
Posts: 26766
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 3/19/2007
Member: #1388
Russian Federation
5/19/2009  11:05 PM
you can't make the balls "weighted" cause then same team would have an incredibly high chance to win every time since they replace the balls after every drawing. the system semms fair from a mathematical point of view.
Everything you have ever wanted is on the other side of fear- George Adair
Pharzeone
Posts: 32183
Alba Posts: 14
Joined: 2/11/2005
Member: #871
5/19/2009  11:05 PM
Posted by Andrew:

It was mentioned on air that it was the machine that was used. The balls in the demo were not used. The real balls were kept by the auditors.

So the auditors allowed those guys to hover over the machine prior to the draft? Or after the process? I didn't see the start of it. I would have a problem with prior.
I don't like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies - Mike D'Antoni
Pharzeone
Posts: 32183
Alba Posts: 14
Joined: 2/11/2005
Member: #871
5/19/2009  11:06 PM
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by Andrew:

It was mentioned on air that it was the machine that was used. The balls in the demo were not used. The real balls were kept by the auditors.


Auditors what a scam.

?
I don't like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies - Mike D'Antoni
Andrew
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #1
USA
5/19/2009  11:08 PM
Posted by Pharzeone:

So the auditors allowed those guys to hover over the machine prior to the draft? Or after the process? I didn't see the start of it. I would have a problem with prior.

Don't know when ESPN filmed their bit.
PURE KNICKS LOVE
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
5/19/2009  11:13 PM
Dude, that was good for 55% eFG%. For the nation's leading scorer that is very, very impressive. It puts him in the top 50 in the country in terms of qualifying players and there are a lot of qualifying players in the country. Too add further context- thats a slightly better number David Lee put up in the NBA this year. When you consider that he was depended upon as his teams only scorer, the fact that he was able to put up such a number when he was in a situation where he had to force shots....well thats really damn impressive.

And in the year before he shot a 61% eFG. That's top 10 in the country- Shaq territory shooting number.

Honestly this EFG number doesn't mean much to me. I don't care about it. It is more or less meaningless.

Curry is a guard who scored a lot at a decent shooting percentage in a mid-major league. He wasn't regularly facing the biggest or the strongest the NCAA has to offer. I'm pretty sure if he played in the Big East his numbers would be less gaudy.

Trying to compare Curry scoring to Shaq or David Lee is absolutely ridiculous. There is nothing to compare about their games.

Curry shot 39% from 21 feet in a mid-major conference you really think he will be that effective shooting the NBA 3, which is 4 feet further? Not to mention with the best players in the world guarding him?

Do you remember Chris Jackson? There is a proper comparison for you: Jackson was much better than Curry in a top 3 conference as a Freshman and Sophomore. And...he became an NBA role player. Scroll down and look at his college stats: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulma02.html

Did you really just compare the scoring style/percentages/ability etc. on any level to Shaq? Just think about that for a minute. I mean come on, that is nothing short of absurd! Okay, I'll give you this, Stephen Curry is definitely a better 3 point shooter than Shaq!

oohah

Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
5/19/2009  11:20 PM
Posted by masud:

A couple things, first of all are those numbers supposed to be bad? Also those numbers we're with Curry being in full on gunner mode (which is what makes them spectacular), Curry had to play like that for Davidson to have a chance he doesn't have to do that in the NBA. He's a smart kid he's gonna be much more efficient in the league. As for the weak conference thing I think Curry would have been better if he played for a big program because people wouldn't have been able to double him as much if he had competent teammates (this will be the case in the NBA). Plus, he went off on some of the best teams in the country in last years tournament while being double teamed the entire game. Guarding Curry 1on1 was not an option in college if you wanted to beat Davidson, that has to translate to something in the NBA,


Okay, let's look at this point by point:

a) No those numbers are not bad.
b) Putting up big numbers as a gunner does not make his numbers more impressive. I can't even figure out the logic behind that statement! Putting up big numbers when an entire offense is designed around 1 guy taking all the shots is more impressive? Maybe you can explain that to me?
c) Curry would produce more if he had better teammates? Goes against all rules of basketball. He took all the shots. Look at how Kobe averages less when he has beter teammates to throw it to. same with Wade. Worse teammates menas his scoring average goes up. Works like this 90% of the time.
d) Curry had some really big games against really good teams. Very true. That does not discount the fact that playing in a mid-level conference helps him pad his stats.

This conversation is starting to become silly.

oohah




Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
VDesai
Posts: 43301
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
5/19/2009  11:21 PM
Meaningless? You win basketball by scoring points right? You score points by shooting right? eFG is the most accurate measure of how many pts you score per shot you use because it actually takes into account the fact that not every shot has the same point value, unlike regular FG%

Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it meaningless.
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
5/19/2009  11:25 PM
Posted by VDesai:

Meaningless? You win basketball by scoring points right? You score points by shooting right? eFG is the most accurate measure of how many pts you score per shot you use because it actually takes into account the fact that not every shot has the same point value, unlike regular FG%

Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it meaningless.

We can come up with all kinds of stats. I just pointed you to a player who was unquestionably better than Curry in a better league earlier in his career who had a beter EFG...and he became an NBA role player.

His EFG at Davidson is meaningless to what he will become in the NBA.

How many players with a better EFG than Curry who played in better leagues than Curry who then had regular to below average NBA careers would you like me to trot out? Because the list is looooooong!

oohah

Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
5/19/2009  11:32 PM
oohah, eFG is a very good advanced stat, and i'll present evidence to support the claim.

if you are a big man who takes almost all of his shots 5-10 feet from the basket, of course your fg% is more likely going to be higher...like eddy curry. yet a player who is jump shooting guard who takes more 3s is clearly taking more difficult to hit shots, so his fg% is probably going to be lower since more of his shots come from outside, which is far more normal for guards and wing players.

eFG% gives much improved insight into players strengths and weaknesses, and sites like 82games.com also shows us eFG% from what spots they take on the floor which is immensely better. to say eFG is meaningless without any evidence seems pretty outlandish, no?

http://www.knickerblogger.net/?p=608
Another stat that should be replaced is FG%. Why? Field goal percentage doesn’t account for the scoring bonus in a three point shot, which is a lower percentage shot. Sharp shooter Kyle Korver’s career FG% (as of 2007) is a lowly 41.3%. If FG% rates a good shooter like Korver so poorly, then it’s obviously not a good stat to use. So replace FG% with eFG% (effective field goal percentage), which compensates for the extra point in a three point shot. Korver’s eFG% is a more robust 53.6%...

In 50 Words or Less

Field goal percentage (FG%) should be replaced by eFG% or TS%. Effective field goal percentage (eFG%) compensates properly for three pointers, while true shooting percentage (TS%) compensates for three pointers and free throws.

Examples Why
Well I used Kyle Korver above, but otherwise you can look at any player that takes a large amount of three pointers or gets (and converts) a lot of free throws. Players like Kevin Martin, Jason Kapono, Manu Ginobili, and Shawn Marion come to mind as players who are misrepresented by FG%.

More please
Kevin Pelton’s Stat Primer: http://www.nba.com/sonics/news/stats101.html
The Basketball Notebook’s Primer: http://basketballnotebook.blogspot.com/2005/12/basketball-notebook-stats-primer.html

[Edited by - PresIke on 05-19-2009 11:34 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
5/19/2009  11:34 PM
Sometimes people just don't understand things and they don't want to understand them because they dont want to be proved wrong. This is one of those cases.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
5/19/2009  11:35 PM
Okay all these players had higher EFG's than Curry: http://faninterference.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/2009s-all-underrated-college-basketball-team/ Are they better than he?

Apparently Curry's EFG is about 150th in the country.

oohah

Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
VDesai
Posts: 43301
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
5/19/2009  11:37 PM
Posted by PresIke:

oohah, eFG is a very good advanced stat, and i'll present evidence to support the claim.

if you are a big man who takes almost all of his shots 5-10 feet from the basket, of course your fg% is more likely going to be higher...like eddy curry.


Which is precisely why I compare Steph Curry's eFG to guys who shoot close to the basket. His shooting efficiency number places him in similar company to guys who can use their physicality to score in close, i.e. he's creating a similar amount of points per each shot he takes as a guy who plays close to the basket. It actually a fairly intuitive and not a very complicated or even derived number.
martin
Posts: 79870
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
5/19/2009  11:37 PM
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by Andrew:

VMart you do realize that its not 14 balls - 1 for each team right? To get the different percentages you would need 1000 total ping pong balls. Lets pause for commecial break for an hour while someone sifts through all 1000 balls and removes the ones from the team that just got picked.

That is fine put thousand ping pongs if you have to. All you have to do instead since there are 14 teams is allot one ball to the 14th team best record and 14 balls to the worst team. atleast the Knicks would have had 8 ping pongs. Now televise it.

All I know is if they are not doing it in public then they are running a scam.

I think this solidifies why the public is not is on this. You don't even understand lottery percentages and how the system works.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
5/19/2009  11:38 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:

Sometimes people just don't understand things and they don't want to understand them because they dont want to be proved wrong. This is one of those cases.

This is one of those cases when people come out with a stat that doesn't reflect reality. Putting up gaudy numbers at Davidson is not the same as doing it at Syracuse or the NBA. If you guys can't understand that, I don't think I can help you.

However, maybe one day, if you guys take up the cause, when everyone talks about the leader in scoring, Field goal percentage, 3 point percentage, and all the other normal stats that seemed to have sufficed for 50 years you can get EFG up in there so we can talk about how Stephen Curry is a better offensive player than Shaq!

oohah
Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
5/19/2009  11:39 PM
that's a pretty weak argument, oohah.

there's a bit more to whether a player is good or not than eFG. the idea is to use it in the context of a particular point about a strength of his game.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
5/19/2009  11:40 PM
Posted by VDesai:


Which is precisely why I compare Steph Curry's eFG to guys who shoot close to the basket. His shooting efficiency number places him in similar company to guys who can use their physicality to score in close, i.e. he's creating a similar amount of points per each shot he takes as a guy who plays close to the basket. It actually a fairly intuitive and not a very complicated or even derived number.

So tell me why Chris Jackson isn't the best shooting guard in NBA history? I believe his College EFG is close to if not better than Michael Jordan's.

oohah



Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
5/19/2009  11:41 PM
Posted by oohah:
Posted by nyk4ever:

Sometimes people just don't understand things and they don't want to understand them because they dont want to be proved wrong. This is one of those cases.

This is one of those cases when people come out with a stat that doesn't reflect reality. Putting up gaudy numbers at Davidson is not the same as doing it at Syracuse or the NBA. If you guys can't understand that, I don't think I can help you.

However, maybe one day, if you guys take up the cause, when everyone talks about the leader in scoring, Field goal percentage, 3 point percentage, and all the other normal stats that seemed to have sufficed for 50 years you can get EFG up in there so we can talk about how Stephen Curry is a better offensive player than Shaq!

oohah

no, it's an example of how you don't seem to understand the use of eFG, and how it is being used to show steph curry's value.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
5/19/2009  11:41 PM
Posted by oohah:
Posted by VDesai:


Which is precisely why I compare Steph Curry's eFG to guys who shoot close to the basket. His shooting efficiency number places him in similar company to guys who can use their physicality to score in close, i.e. he's creating a similar amount of points per each shot he takes as a guy who plays close to the basket. It actually a fairly intuitive and not a very complicated or even derived number.

So tell me why Chris Jackson isn't the best shooting guard in NBA history? I believe his College EFG is close to if not better than Michael Jordan's.

oohah

who is saying eFG% is the ONLY way to measure whether a player is good or not?

[Edited by - PresIke on 05-19-2009 11:42 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
Pharzeone
Posts: 32183
Alba Posts: 14
Joined: 2/11/2005
Member: #871
5/19/2009  11:44 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by Andrew:

VMart you do realize that its not 14 balls - 1 for each team right? To get the different percentages you would need 1000 total ping pong balls. Lets pause for commecial break for an hour while someone sifts through all 1000 balls and removes the ones from the team that just got picked.

That is fine put thousand ping pongs if you have to. All you have to do instead since there are 14 teams is allot one ball to the 14th team best record and 14 balls to the worst team. atleast the Knicks would have had 8 ping pongs. Now televise it.

All I know is if they are not doing it in public then they are running a scam.

I think this solidifies why the public is not is on this. You don't even understand lottery percentages and how the system works.

Martin, that's not fair. Why do you assume he or anyone wouldn't learn the process if it was televised. The only reason why I am at all familar is because I've audited lotteries other than that I wouldn't have a clue because I would have no interest. I am sure if they did a real lottery show and explain the process for everyone, a lot of people would obtain an understanding. Also that way they would ensure no one feels like something funny is going on. Imagine if a state like New York would conduct their lottery system in a back room.
I don't like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies - Mike D'Antoni
Page 12 of 16 « First‹ Previous 10  11  12  13  14 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
NBA Draft Lotto Thread - May 19 - 2009
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy