Too many 3's? We're a solid 12th in eFG

Crummy offense? 18th in the league in offensive efficiency and we're right around the league average (which is brought down substantially by NJ)

Turnovers? Actually have the 10th best turnover rate.

Things that do kill us:

Poor defense? We give up 2 more points 100 possessions than the league average, so this is a good choice. Are we getting better?

Rebounding? 28th in the league, ouch!! Though surprisingly we have the 11th best defensive rebounding rate. However, we also have the 29th worst offensive rebounding rate. While DLee has been beasting the defensive boards, him playing perimeter gives us no threat to gather any offensive boards.

I suppose it's these reasons that the last ~12 games are so encouraging. We're done so much better on the defense and rebounding. We were close or winning in rebounding in almost all of those games.

fishmike wrote:

djsunyc wrote:imho, hollinger has added absolutely nothing to basketball...

the thing that makes BB great in my opinion is the randomness, the split second improvisation and the scoring runs. You start crunching these #s and you try to analize a sport while disregarding what makes it great. Its crap for the #s nerds and guys who would rather look at #s then game footage.

Totally agree w/ DJ

Don't see why you can't do both. The fun of basketball is watching but it doesn't mean statistics can't help in understanding why teams win and lose.

OldFan wrote:

fishmike wrote:

djsunyc wrote:imho, hollinger has added absolutely nothing to basketball...

the thing that makes BB great in my opinion is the randomness, the split second improvisation and the scoring runs. You start crunching these #s and you try to analize a sport while disregarding what makes it great. Its crap for the #s nerds and guys who would rather look at #s then game footage.

Totally agree w/ DJ

Don't see why you can't do both. The fun of basketball is watching but it doesn't mean statistics can't help in understanding why teams win and lose.

hollinger uses stats to compare players and say why one player is better than another...when a player's role and impact in a game is reliant on so many factors like teammates, coach, system, division, conference, schedule, etc...

using it as a reference, i can see, but his over anal-ysis of stats is being used to form final conclusions...which i think is trivial.

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:I like his stats as reference points. Oh and by the way MATH is the language of the Universe:). almost Everything can be expressed as a mathematicl equation you just need to find the right variables to plug in.
You can track trends and refute myths and misperceptions. People keep bringing up cliches about what this team does wrong or MDA's system and the numbers prove them wrong.

haha... math is the universal language yet it cant explain everything and therefore means very little. Basketball, like the natural world cant be expressed in math, and cant be predicted with math. Organic is just that.. organic. Math is suitable for all thing non biological. Once you intoduce life you introduce chaos. Anyone thats had kids knows this! You can track tendencies but as the old saying goes.. you never know and thats why they play the games.

Actually you're wrong! Eventually everything will be expressed mathematically it's only a matter of time. Even randomization can be calculated and expressed. The point isn't that we try to reduce everything to numbers but that it's another tool to track progress or compare which helps.

The unusual way MDA has his teams play often needs to be made clearer by a closer look at the numbers. When I was trying to explain that MDA does have a defensive system but it's as unorthodox as his offense. I was saying how characteristics of his teams are low assists allowed and lots of steals. We've seen the numbers for this team follow that same line.

nixluva wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:I like his stats as reference points. Oh and by the way MATH is the language of the Universe:). almost Everything can be expressed as a mathematicl equation you just need to find the right variables to plug in.
You can track trends and refute myths and misperceptions. People keep bringing up cliches about what this team does wrong or MDA's system and the numbers prove them wrong.

haha... math is the universal language yet it cant explain everything and therefore means very little. Basketball, like the natural world cant be expressed in math, and cant be predicted with math. Organic is just that.. organic. Math is suitable for all thing non biological. Once you intoduce life you introduce chaos. Anyone thats had kids knows this! You can track tendencies but as the old saying goes.. you never know and thats why they play the games.

Actually you're wrong! Eventually everything will be expressed mathematically it's only a matter of time. Even randomization can be calculated and expressed. The point isn't that we try to reduce everything to numbers but that it's another tool to track progress or compare which helps.

The unusual way MDA has his teams play often needs to be made clearer by a closer look at the numbers. When I was trying to explain that MDA does have a defensive system but it's as unorthodox as his offense. I was saying how characteristics of his teams are low assists allowed and lots of steals. We've seen the numbers for this team follow that same line.

And Futurama is the greatest prove to this...