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

top 5 man units...courtesy of 82games.com
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
11/29/2005  3:16 PM
Posted by Allanfan20:

Don't feel bad McK1. That's what we all feel after reading a Bonn post. It can cause major post tramatic stress disorder. Maybe search around and find a Nalod post and you'll feel better.

Maybe the same could be said after reading one of rvhoss's posts.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
AUTOADVERT
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
11/29/2005  3:16 PM
Posted by Killa4luv:

Also the youngsters playing in garbage time drastically affects those stats.

DJ, knock yourself out pushing for that starting lineup. We wouldn't win a single game like that!!! But we might win Greg Oden!

I'm not so sure. At least our kids dominate the scrubs, I'm not sure our starters would. for instance, if I remember correctly that lineup of Nate-Craw-Ariza-Lee-Frye might have been the one Larry used when he sat Steph to get us back in the game, as he explained to the media,

I don't know, maybe my eyes or memory deceives me but get the sense whenever all the kids play together their games mesh well, and they almost always hustle us back into games, they play with chemistry as an effective unit with a high energy, uptempo, defensively disruptive, team identity. They only seem less effective to me when they are sprinkled in with the 'starters'. That's when they appear to struggle, just like their starter counterparts.

Thus, I'm not at all surprised to that unit excel in the +/- department. I'm just waiting for the day we can see what that unit can do with quality minutes. I'm well aware of the offensive deficiencies of some of those guys and that entire unit, but there is something to be said for chemistry and identity and playing beyond the sum of it's parts. Unfortunately thats something we've rarely been able to experience these past couple of years.
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/29/2005  4:12 PM
Posted by Allanfan20:
Posted by Allanfan20:

Don't feel bad McK1. That's what we all feel after reading a Bonn post. It can cause major post tramatic stress disorder. Maybe search around and find a Nalod post and you'll feel better.

Maybe the same could be said after reading one of rvhoss's posts.

hoss posts -



the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/29/2005  7:07 PM
Posted by Allanfan20:

Don't feel bad McK1. That's what we all feel after reading a Bonn post. It can cause major post tramatic stress disorder. Maybe search around and find a Nalod post and you'll feel better.

Sorry; I guess it was very rude of me to thank Tom and Fish. My bad.
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
11/29/2005  7:35 PM
Posted by McK1:

the reply was about the individual +/- discussion.

Showing the net only means we went from bad to worse which only opens up another can of worms about the roster IT assembled - another topic beaten to a 33-49 pulp.


You don't seem to get what +/- is about. If you only look at team +/- when Marbury is on the court, then what you're measuring is how all 5 man units that included Marbury performed. In other words, you can't sift out what portions of that performance were due to Marbury, and what portions were due to his four teammates. The only way to do this is to compare team performance when Marbury was *on* the court to team performance when Marbury was *off* the court-- that gives you a much better idea of the specific contributions made by Marbury himself, as opposed to those made by his teammates. Of course, net +/- alone is not a perfect way to measure this, since the way a player's team performs when he is off the court also depends on the quality of that player's replacement.

Nonetheless, the basic idea behind +/- is to try to evaluate a single player's performance by comparing what his team does when is and is not on the floor. If you only look at one of those conditions (on or off, but not both), you can't measure individual performances at all. Think about it-- if you surrounded Michael Jordan with a bunch of 12th men from the CBA, then that team would perform terribly even when Jordan was on the court. This alone says very little about Jordan and very much about the team as a whole unit. Now, if you compare how the team does when Jordan is on the court vs. when he is off, *then* you can see that he has made a huge contribution to quality of team play.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
fishmike
Posts: 53136
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
11/29/2005  7:52 PM
Posted by McK1:
nd of course the pg match-up was one considering Steph was the 3rd or 4th leading scorer among pgs. Teams playing NY live with Steph scoring alot b/c he gives it right back on the defensive end with allowing any and every opposing guard in the lane as he conserves his energy for offense.
doesnt matter. If that was the case we would lose that matchup. As bad as Marbury's defense was (I agree it was poor, most PGs play bad D) the point is we still won that matchup everynight.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
SlimPack
Posts: 23588
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/14/2005
Member: #1009
USA
11/29/2005  8:15 PM
good point fishmike. oh and by the way, marbury sucks
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
11/29/2005  8:36 PM
I love stats, but how misleading can they ever be. It's ridiculous to base the entire out come of a game or even half a game on statistics. Only a blind man would look at those stats and belive that were better off with a majority rookie starting line up. They may play good for the amount of time there on the floor, but given an additinal 10 minutes, would the difference still be favoring them positively...Doubt it, fatigue and mistakes are bound to off set those numbers.

The bottom Line is simple, LB needs to find the nine or 10 guy's he's goning to roll with, and get focus. This in one day out the next is getting hilarious to say the least.
ES
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
11/29/2005  9:13 PM
Take a look at the FT % and the high TO's, It's the simple thing you miss that always creates the biggest problems. More then half the team is shooting ft well under the average ( which should be at least 78%) and it's not like we get there a whole lot.

The constant Turnovers off careless passes, and just really not valuing every possension as if it's your last,or at least 2nd to last.

If This roster can correct some simple things that are easy to control then your postives will begin to out weigh your negatives.
ES
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/29/2005  9:16 PM
+/- gurus

how does a - 0.4 for a guy who logged 39 minutes per and was the primary ball-handler and no. 1 shot taker translate to the win-loss column.

last I checked there was no category for implied (he won the pg match-up) or moral (well we would've loss by an avg of 12 instead of 2) victories.
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
11/29/2005  9:18 PM
Posted by knicks1248:

I love stats, but how misleading can they ever be.

Stats aren't misleading; people who misuse or misinterpret stats are misleading.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/29/2005  9:22 PM
stats don't tell the whole story. If it did Jason Kidd wouldn't impact a game and the win column no more than Brevin Knight does.
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
11/29/2005  9:26 PM
Posted by McK1:

how does a - 0.4 for a guy who logged 39 minutes per and was the primary ball-handler and no. 1 shot taker translate to the win-loss column.

Your question can't be answered. If you have a guy whose team is -0.4 when he plays but is +17 when he does not play, then that -0.4 might translate into a lot of wins.

And again-- since you seemed to miss it last time-- you simply cannot come to any conclusions about a single player judging by his team's +/- when he is on the court. To evaluate that player, you have to compare his team's +/- when he is on the court vs. when he is off. Does that not make sense to you?

Back to the Jordan CBA team example. Suppose Jordan in his prime is on a team where all his teammates are CBA scrubs, but they play in the NBA. This team's +/- with Jordan on the floor is, say, -20. That is entirely plausible, assuming his teammates are just that bad. Then McK1 comes along and asks us about Jordan:

"how does a - 20 for a guy who logged 40 minutes per and was the primary ball-handler and no. 1 shot taker translate to the win-loss column. last I checked there was no category for implied (he won the sg match-up) or moral (well we would've loss by an avg of 60 instead of 20) victories."

So basically, McK1 looks at the team's +/- when Jordan is on the floor, sees that it is terrible, and blames this on Jordan. Smart, huh?

What McK1 fails to realize is that when Jordan is not playing, his team's +/- plummets to -60.

[Edited by - tomverve on 11-29-2005 9:30 PM]
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
11/29/2005  9:28 PM
Posted by McK1:

stats don't tell the whole story. If it did Jason Kidd wouldn't impact a game and the win column no more than Brevin Knight does.


Well, that's really an absurdly false claim, but it is true that boxscore stats don't capture everything in a game. But stats need not be limited to boxscore stats.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/29/2005  10:19 PM
Posted by tomverve:
Posted by McK1:

how does a - 0.4 for a guy who logged 39 minutes per and was the primary ball-handler and no. 1 shot taker translate to the win-loss column.



And again-- since you seemed to miss it last time-- you simply cannot come to any conclusions about a single player judging by his team's +/- when he is on the court. To evaluate that player, you have to compare his team's +/- when he is on the court vs. when he is off. Does that not make sense to you?



[Edited by - tomverve on 11-29-2005 9:30 PM]

bringing MJ into this is pointless because he didn't have a negative rating and his teams won.

If you wish to argue NY's ability to compete based on if they do or don't have steph out there that is all well and good but the problem is victories are not measued by that. I don't know whats important to you but I care about the effort and the win. NY played with little effort last season and loss 49 games. If your point guard and also best player doesn't deserve some of the responsibility for a veteran team playing like they came straight from the D-league than what player on the squad does?
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/29/2005  10:28 PM
bringing MJ into this is pointless because he didn't have a negative rating and his teams won.
I don't know what Jordan's +/- on the court #s were but I'd bet they were negative on the lottery teams he played on. His +/- on/off court #s were probably always very good, which are the better way to assess a player's net impact for all the reasons tom indicated.
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
11/29/2005  10:34 PM
The bottom line is do you think our best +- five is realy our best 5?
Hell no. JYD's +- might have been crazy too, he impacted the games greatly while he was in the games, but start him and you find out that its only good in short spurts. He is the defiition of a bench player. As are all those guys on our best +- 5 except for Frye and Crawford. This thread is ridiculous.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/29/2005  10:48 PM
The bottom line is do you think our best +- five is realy our best 5?
I don't think anyone's saying that that would be the correct way to interpret the +/- statistics.
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/29/2005  10:49 PM
I really hope you aren't using 40 year old fresh out of a second retirement with Wizards Jordan as a basis on how we should view and judge Steph.

Jordan with the Bulls made the play-offs every season he was there. If there is a site that has the +/- for the early years I dsoubt very highly it was negative even when he was the team.
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/29/2005  10:57 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
bringing MJ into this is pointless because he didn't have a negative rating and his teams won.
I don't know what Jordan's +/- on the court #s were but I'd bet they were negative on the lottery teams he played on. His +/- on/off court #s were probably always very good, which are the better way to assess a player's net impact for all the reasons tom indicated.
If you want to go by just the "on" court +/- #s, then almost any star on a bad team is going to have a negative, be it Marbury last year, Jordan on lottery teams, or any of the following players this year:

Allen Iverson (-1.2)
Paul Pierce (-1.2)
Michael Redd (-2.7)
Steve Francis (-2.0)
Chris Bosh (-8.2)
Ray Allen (-1.4)
Steve Nash (-2.4)

The obvious confound is that these guys simply have bad teams. Their teams are all much worse with them off than on the court; so they have positive +/-on-off court #s even though they have negative +/- on court #s.
Page 2 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
top 5 man units...courtesy of 82games.com
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2012 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