franco12 wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/12/23/opponent-wp48-and-opponent-adjusted-wp48-for-2010/

Scroll 3/4 of the way down to the very last chart. It's a picture and not actual text because I don't think he wants people to cut and paste it (which I think is very lame).

A quick look at that chart, and I think our off season target should be Zach Randolph!

LMFAO! hey look, good ol' Zach is #19 on that list... i can't believe we ever let him go for that worthless Amare Stoudamire when he can only rank at #41!

hey, i see Troy Murphy ranks #26 on this list, he might be a nice plan B!

GET ER DONE DONNIE!

martin wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

martin wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

martin wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

martin wrote:SupremeCommander, clutch stats very different that than what you had suggested previously. I don't doubt that and it seems backed up pretty nicely with stats what we can all read easily.

When you need him to score, he scores. How can this not be considered "automatic"? I stand by my assessment that he's an "automatic scoring option that plays the wing."

That's the thing, he doesn't do it on a more consistent basis than a LOT of other guys in the league across the whole game, just at the very end of a game. You know, perhaps if he hadn't shot the ball so poorly or shot it as well as the other guys, he may not have been in that same position.

That last sentence is obviously a stretch. But if he is "automatic" does that mean all of the other guys ahead of him in TS% (with some guys you obviously drop cause of circumstance), does that really mean they are MORE automatic?

He isn't great three point shooter, w eknow this, and I don't think he'll be asked to do that here. eFG% and TS% will penalize him for that, but the Knicks would have other players shoot that shot. I don't see the need to penalize him for that. Why factor something he won't regularly be asked to do here into the mix?

Shouldn't some qualitative analysis go into the mix here too? I can't think of one player I'd rather have shoot from the elbow than maybe Dirk Nowitzki. At any time of the game.

But back to the original point of Melo not contributing to anything other scoring: he's ranked 59th in the history of the NBA/ABA in PER

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_career.html

Just to keep the discussion on point, this wins produced stat is bogus

I am not penalizing Melo for shooting 3's, he is doing it to himself; it's what makes him a bad shooter, or at least a poor decision maker for a shooter. And in fact Melo shoots very little 3pointers as compared to other SF (or those who we would compare him too), so it shouldn't take away from the fact that he is only an average midrange shooter.

One example: Melo take about 10% of his shots from 3point land. Pierce is near 25%, LeBron 18%, Durant 25%.

If he's so average, and doesn't do anything other than score, why's he made the All NBA 3rd Team three times and 2nd Team once?

cause the voters overrate offense and ESPN highlights?

I don't buy that. I think if you make that list it means you're one of the 20 best players in the league. Maybe there's some debate but that list means something. It's not like saying Allen Iverson made the All Star team when he's barely played

http://www.nba.com/history/awards_allnba.html

FistOfOakley wrote:if you goto hoopdata, you'll see that melo is about a more inefficient version of amar'e without the ability to block shots.

the type of shots and where they take it are very similar.

It's not intuitive to me how to do that, got a link? And can you call up Wade and Bron too while you're at it? How about Pierce/Garnett and Kobe/Gasol?

Killa4luv wrote:sometimes u guys dissappoint me so much. So is this why we shouldn't get Melo? Cuz some nerd found an algorithm that says sigh. Sigh.
The same guys who loved David Lee's hollow numbers and thought he could give you 90% of what Amare would. smh

i've seen guys go to some extreme lengths to try & search for excuses why Melo wouldn't make us a better team, but this one has to take the cake... Melo doesn't help teams win games... wow... that's some earth shattering stuff right there... let's get this memo out to the Nuggets GM so he can come to his senses & let him go for Eddy Curry's expiring & a conditional 2nd round pick.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/news/story?id=6017874&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba%2finsider%2fnews%2fstory%3fid%3d6017874

"The new millennium hasn't exactly been kind to the New York Knicks and their fans. But after years of futility, the team finally has Madison Square Garden rocking like it did in the mid-90s. And while New York is still a player or two away from being respected as a contender, Mike D'Antoni's crew has proved it is playoff-caliber.

Rumors have been swirling for months that general manager Donnie Walsh covets Denver Nuggets forward Carmelo Anthony, who will be a free agent this summer. In the eyes of most fans and pundits, he would make the Knicks an elite squad. But with the recent buzz surrounding a trade that would send Anthony to the New Jersey Nets, many Knicks fans are in panic mode, and some are suggesting the team should trade for him now because he is the quickest ticket to a title. Those Knickerbockers fans concerned about losing out on Anthony should step back off the ledge -- he won't make the team that much better, and they're probably better off without him.

There's no doubt that Anthony can fill it up. And when he's on he can take over a game like few others. However, if you were to rank the Knicks' 10 biggest problems, scoring would not be one of them. At 108.8 points per 100 possessions, New York has the third most efficient offense in the league. The team's softest spots are perimeter defense, rebounding and a lack of a backup point guard. Melo does very little to improve the squad in those areas. Let's break them down one by one....."

martin wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

martin wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

martin wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

martin wrote:SupremeCommander, clutch stats very different that than what you had suggested previously. I don't doubt that and it seems backed up pretty nicely with stats what we can all read easily.

When you need him to score, he scores. How can this not be considered "automatic"? I stand by my assessment that he's an "automatic scoring option that plays the wing."

That's the thing, he doesn't do it on a more consistent basis than a LOT of other guys in the league across the whole game, just at the very end of a game. You know, perhaps if he hadn't shot the ball so poorly or shot it as well as the other guys, he may not have been in that same position.

That last sentence is obviously a stretch. But if he is "automatic" does that mean all of the other guys ahead of him in TS% (with some guys you obviously drop cause of circumstance), does that really mean they are MORE automatic?

He isn't great three point shooter, w eknow this, and I don't think he'll be asked to do that here. eFG% and TS% will penalize him for that, but the Knicks would have other players shoot that shot. I don't see the need to penalize him for that. Why factor something he won't regularly be asked to do here into the mix?

Shouldn't some qualitative analysis go into the mix here too? I can't think of one player I'd rather have shoot from the elbow than maybe Dirk Nowitzki. At any time of the game.

But back to the original point of Melo not contributing to anything other scoring: he's ranked 59th in the history of the NBA/ABA in PER

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_career.html

Just to keep the discussion on point, this wins produced stat is bogus

I am not penalizing Melo for shooting 3's, he is doing it to himself; it's what makes him a bad shooter, or at least a poor decision maker for a shooter. And in fact Melo shoots very little 3pointers as compared to other SF (or those who we would compare him too), so it shouldn't take away from the fact that he is only an average midrange shooter.

One example: Melo take about 10% of his shots from 3point land. Pierce is near 25%, LeBron 18%, Durant 25%.

If he's so average, and doesn't do anything other than score, why's he made the All NBA 3rd Team three times and 2nd Team once?

cause the voters overrate offense and ESPN highlights?

who needs empirical evidence when charts like this are so much more reliable?

GustavBahler wrote:

LOL... classic

SupremeCommander wrote:

TMS wrote:

jrodmc wrote:Yes of course, Melo is merely a figment of fan imagination. Must be the altitude out there. Or maybe it's just another Mormon conspiracy to keep attention away from the Jazz.

The Lugnuts only make the playoffs because of the superlative talents of people like Nene, Camby and maybe even the Birdman. Or possibly it's the scowling persona of JR Whiff. No wait, it's Chauncy! Chauncy is the key to the Nuggets resurgence, but wait, the NugNets were making the playoffs before they got Chauncy, right...??? Hmmmm, maybe it's George Carl! That's it, it's George Carl, he's what the Knicks need! Let's see, we've already had most of the rest of their roster, so that can't be what makes the Nuggets win...hmmmmmm...

No, it was AI!!!! That was the turning point! We need to get AI out of Turkey, or China, or Israel, or dayum!, where the heck is he now! I bet we won't even need to sign him to a max contract, either.

Get somebody to plug AI into that stupid algorithum... bet he adds 20-30 wins easy....

clearly, Melo is just a hologram created by the masses to distract people from the REAL reason the Nuggets have been winning for the past 7 years

come on... Kenyon Martin has won everywhere he's went! Kenyon Martin statistically correlates to winning basketball

K-Mart would have been nothing without Rocky!

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.

what you are suggesting is that if you can find 1 anomaly (or some anomalies) within a particular statistical way of trying to grade out players, you should throw the whole thing out, rather than trying to see if some of it pans out and should at least be considered.

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.

what you are suggesting is that if you can find 1 anomaly (or some anomalies) within a particular statistical way of trying to grade out players, you should throw the whole thing out, rather than trying to see if some of it pans out and should at least be considered.

there's not just 1 anomaly there dude... take a look at the list & you'll see a whole bunch of anomalies that make this chart worthless

http://arturogalletti.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/untitled37.png

check out where players like Dirk Nowitzki ranks in comparison to Troy Murphy... take a look where Amare ranks in respect to David Lee & Chris Bosh... Russell Westbrook is #66 on the list compared to Matt Barnes at #36... i can go on & on & on... this list is ridiculously skewed... i can't even believe you are using this to try & formulate any kind of conclusion whatsoever in regards to Melo's value as an NBA player... i thought u were better than that.

I'm not. I've stated about 5 times in the thread that I don't understand the stat itself.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.

what you are suggesting is that if you can find 1 anomaly (or some anomalies) within a particular statistical way of trying to grade out players, you should throw the whole thing out, rather than trying to see if some of it pans out and should at least be considered.

there's not just 1 anomaly there dude... take a look at the list & you'll see a whole bunch of anomalies that make this chart worthless

http://arturogalletti.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/untitled37.png

check out where players like Dirk Nowitzki ranks in comparison to Troy Murphy... take a look where Amare ranks in respect to David Lee & Chris Bosh... Russell Westbrook is #66 on the list compared to Matt Barnes at #36... i can go on & on & on... this list is ridiculously skewed... i can't even believe you are using this to try & formulate any kind of conclusion whatsoever in regards to Melo's value as an NBA player... i thought u were better than that.

I'm not. I've stated about 5 times in the thread that I don't understand the stat itself.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

i don't understand it either, because it makes absolutely no sense to me to see guys like Matt Barnes ranked ahead of Dirk Nowitzki... i seemed to have failed economics in school... never figured that would come back to haunt me later in life but maybe Professor Berri can explain to us why any of us should even try to understand his earth shattering statistics?