dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:i have to believe that both the player and the team are taking full advantage of the access they have to these rankings. it's hard to argue with these numbers. personally i think they provide a more accurate value system than win share and PER.

Teams employ people to do their own data mining too. I imagine they have all kid of numbers besides the box score stats fans use. That doesn't mean that this stat isn't useful but that there are all kind of numbers available. Kevi Durant used to employ a personal advance statistician

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

it's a net positive sum, meaning that it takes both offense and defense numbers. he is not an offensive player, and he isn't suited to the triangle. now if you want to castigate him for his defense that's another story. the numbers don't lie.

they dont? Did you watch Chandler play last year? What do the numbers actually say? Because I have Chandler as a zero sum player last year on both ends and these #s dont lie either:
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK18.HTM

Knicks were just as good defensively when Tyson was off the floor. Opposing centers shot .533 eFG% so he wasnt locking anyone down. Not sure what #s your looking at by I cant find anything that says Chandler had any impact on defense (last year).

Wait, are you really challenging the idea that the defense was a few points better when Tyson was at center than when Bargs or Amare was? What you cited was only the man-to-man defensive #s, nothing about help defense.

no... what I cited was the Knicks TEAM defense when Chandler is on the floor vs. off the floor.
Knicks with Tyson | Knicks w/o Tyson
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 111.1 107.6 +3.5
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.3 110.5 -0.2

Knicks defense was literally the same regardless of Tyson being on the court or off.

Points Scored 3429 4655 -1226
Points Allowed 3416 4733 -1317
A pretty even sample size no?

Effective FG% Allowed 51.7% 51.1% +0.6%
Here's one that says Knicks were a little better with Tyson

Rebounding
Offensive Rebounding 28.7% 26.8% +1.9%
Defensive Rebounding 73.1% 70.5% +2.6%
Total Rebounding 50.9% 48.6% +2.3%
If you want to find one positive the Knicks were a better rebounding team with Tyson on the floor

Bonn... do you disagree with these #s? I mean when Tyson isnt on the floor who was? Bargs? Amare? Cole? Tyler? I mean if Tyson's backup was some defensive specialist OK.. maybe thats not fair, but the fact that this shows the Knicks were simply not better defensively with him on the floor says a lot doesnt? And you watched I think you would have observed the same

no it means that the knicks roster was compromised back in february 2011 when carmelo was brought in by dolan over walsh's and d'antoni's dead bodies.

it's a domino effect that jackson is now trying to stop which is why melo cannot hope to get max money here in ny.

right... so you have no retort. Bonn? He's actually capable of a response. I was looking forward to that.

no actually what you just did right here was a "retort," jerkov. your honey nut cheerio boy who was crying out by the busses is not coming back to new york. and forever hated by new yorkers once he goes. how does that make you feel? i hope bad

lol.. you suck at posting and hurling insults. Kind of ironic you derailed your own thread. Hee haw.

good that you think i suck at hurling insults since that gives me carte blanche to continue. i think everybody knows by now what YOU are good at sucking.

meanwhile this is where the thread got derailed:

yeah durant was probably among the first to do so. i remember the NYT magazine had an article on that. it was primarily shot charting. then there was another article about the guy who created a company out of this service, where he stated that he and durant looked at all aspects of his game and tried to shore up wherever he was weak so that he could become a complete player.

i really think the value of this stat of RPM is that it could be the most accurate picture of what a positive-sum player is-- though i'd be happy to be taught why it isn't.

short of being a complete player, a positive-sum player is the next best thing.

spurs have 5 players in the top 40.
heat have 2.
clips have 3.
okc has 4.
memphis has 2.
knicks had 1: ty chandler

if your stat has Chandler as the Knick's 1 positive sum player then that stat sucks. Sorry. Open your eyes.

if puppy don't want his nose stuck in his own doody then puppy needs to learn to do his doody somewhere else.

I cant compete with that... how can anyone? your right! you win again. March on... your quest calls you.

not getting uncomfortable now are you?

where ya from, son? it can't be new york city.

The mama jokes just have to be next.

Dagger wrote:I like any stat that makes CarSMELLo look bad, and I make believe any that don't just go away -DK7yearsold

Fixed.

PG is one spot below Melo. Would anyone be offering PG a max contract? Just asking.