Red Tiger Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 3 hours ago, briantw said: I generally consider an elite shooter to be anyone who shoots over 40% from three. And handles absolutely matter. They just don't matter if the rest of your game is terrible. But I don't know how anyone can watch Kyrie play and say that his handles are an enormous part of why he's as good as he is. Eh, typo? Anyway. I worry for Tywin and his team if they actually give Wiggins a big contract, cause he's not gonna be a monster. Kyrie desperately wants to be the man, but im surprised that he considered San Antonio one of the trading options, as he would be Kawhi's second-in-command on that squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Red Tiger said: Eh, typo? Anyway. I worry for Tywin and his team if they actually give Wiggins a big contract, cause he's not gonna be a monster. Kyrie desperately wants to be the man, but im surprised that he considered San Antonio one of the trading options, as he would be Kawhi's second-in-command on that squad. Yeah, forgot the "not." I edited it to fix it. And yeah, Wiggins getting a max would be a terrible, terrible decision. A franchise-crippling decision. If Minny were smart, they'd be trying to package Wiggins for the next disgruntled star. I doubt it's enough to get Kyrie, but you never know with another team. After all, Indiana just sold Paul George for a bag of stale chips and Victor Oladipo. As for why he'd be okay with San Antonio, the only thing I can think of is that Kawhi would be fine with letting him have the limelight, whereas in Cleveland he'll always be overshadowed by LeBron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 19 hours ago, briantw said: And saying their stats were almost identical completely ignores advanced stats. I don't really care about box score stats, as they are often (like in the case of Wiggins) very deceiving. See, I'm just the opposite. I'll always welcome more information, but I think advanced stats can be misleading. I've seen tons of examples of average to bad players having really good advanced stats and vice versa with good players having bad advanced stats. I'm not saying this is the case with Wiggins, but just in a general sense. And I also think advanced stats are the least meaningful in basketball compared to other sports. It's the sport that I put the most emphasis on the eye test. 19 hours ago, briantw said: Again, I don't hate Wiggins, but if you're trading Kyrie, you need to bring someone back who can do more than just score. Like ME has argued, Kyrie can do more than just score, but it's largely what he offers you. He's a great scorer, maybe top 5 in the league, but everything else he offers you is fairly average at best. Again, if we didn't sign Teague, I'd trade Wiggins for Irving in a heart beat. But as of now he just doesn't fit. You can't play Teague and Irving together against the other top teams in the league. Also, I'd lower your expectations about what you'll get back in return for Kyrie. He's worth a lot, but looking at the other trades that happened recently, you won't get much back in return for him, and this happened at the worst possible time for the Cavs. Had this leaked before the draft, you could expect to get a big haul. But as of now, you'll be lucky to get two picks and a decent player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 Kyrie's a closer, a cold blooded clutch player. I wouldnt under estimate his value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 23 hours ago, Tywin et al. said: See, I'm just the opposite. I'll always welcome more information, but I think advanced stats can be misleading. I've seen tons of examples of average to bad players having really good advanced stats and vice versa with good players having bad advanced stats. I'm not saying this is the case with Wiggins, but just in a general sense. PER and such? Misleading. Wages of Wins and Boxscoregeeks? Scarily solid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 6 hours ago, Red Tiger said: PER and such? Misleading. Wages of Wins and Boxscoregeeks? Scarily solid. Yeah PER in and of itself isn't a great metric, as it really only measures offensive efficiency and doesn't really factor in minutes played (it's obviously harder to be consistently efficient for over 35 minutes a game than 10). It's not an awful stat, though, when you factor it in with various other advanced stats. And the bottom line is that Irving measures well in most of the advanced stats. He measures like you'd expect a star player to. He's not a top ten guy in the league or anything, but he's in that top thirty area. Wiggins, on the other hand, doesn't look like a guy who is going to magically become a star when you look at his advanced stats. Granted I haven't done much research, but it's hard to imagine there's a single star player in the NBA who had advanced stats as awful as Wiggins' were in their third year. When you couple that with the overpay he's about to receive, do not want. He just strikes me as an empty stats guy. Scores a lot, but doesn't impact the game positively at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 2 hours ago, briantw said: Yeah PER in and of itself isn't a great metric, as it really only measures offensive efficiency and doesn't really factor in minutes played (it's obviously harder to be consistently efficient for over 35 minutes a game than 10). It's not an awful stat, though, when you factor it in with various other advanced stats. Uhm yeah, it really is. It goes up the more you shoot after you make about 30% of your shots. I repeat, the more you shoot, you don't even need to make your shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted July 30, 2017 Share Posted July 30, 2017 41 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: Uhm yeah, it really is. It goes up the more you shoot after you make about 30% of your shots. I repeat, the more you shoot, you don't even need to make your shots. I think it's not awful in that, if you sort players by PER, it has a tendency to do a pretty good job of putting the good players at or near the top and the shitty players near the bottom. It's by no means a perfect metric, but it does work to some extent in measuring the offensive capabilities of a player. When you combine it with various other metrics you can get a general sense of the quality of a player. But, of course, comparing players solely by their PER is worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibandar Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 Trump on Irving laughing at Curry's mocking of LeBron during Harrison Barnes wedding: Not good. Very sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 On 7/29/2017 at 11:00 AM, Red Tiger said: Wages of Wins and Boxscoregeeks? Scarily solid. Honestly, I don't even think I've heard of those. Like I said, I don't put a ton of stock into advanced analytics in basketball. On 7/29/2017 at 6:58 PM, Red Tiger said: Uhm yeah, it really is. It goes up the more you shoot after you make about 30% of your shots. I repeat, the more you shoot, you don't even need to make your shots. Agreed. I read a story shortly before the Wolves played the Nuggets that argued that not only was Jokic better than KAT, but that he was significantly better and he wouldn't trade him for KAT and Wiggins. He drew this conclusion because Jokic's PER was 2 points higher than KAT's. And KAT proceeded to destroy him in that game and the following one as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said: Honestly, I don't even think I've heard of those. Like I said, I don't put a ton of stock into advanced analytics in basketball. Agreed. I read a story shortly before the Wolves played the Nuggets that argued that not only was Jokic better than KAT, but that he was significantly better and he wouldn't trade him for KAT and Wiggins. He drew this conclusion because Jokic's PER was 2 points higher than KAT's. And KAT proceeded to destroy him in that game and the following one as well. It gets even worse, take a look at this. Now keep in mind it's about the total contributions of one player to his team. https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_career.html See the immense bias to volume scorers. No disrespect to those other players, but you can not name 13 players who contributed more to their team than Magic Johnson. Blake Griffin higher than Kevin Garnett. Hell no. Yao Ming at 21, way too high. Bill Russell, the cornerstone of the Celtics Dynasty: 102 Excuse me while I vomit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 15 hours ago, Calibandar said: Trump on Irving laughing at Curry's mocking of LeBron during Harrison Barnes wedding: Not good. Very sad. Curry doesn't get enough flack for being maybe the douchiest player in the entire NBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, sperry said: Curry doesn't get enough flack for being maybe the douchiest player in the entire NBA. Well yeah, but that's cause LeBron is still in the league. Did you see the video he was laughing at? /Not suggesting this excuses Curry's reaction, I don't think it was a smart thing to record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 PER is a very good stat. It's not the end all be all, and anyone who argues otherwise is just being foolish. Nor would people who understand the stats make that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibandar Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 10 hours ago, sperry said: Curry doesn't get enough flack for being maybe the douchiest player in the entire NBA. He is very unlikable for some reason. He seems like a sneaky little dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted August 2, 2017 Author Share Posted August 2, 2017 4 hours ago, Calibandar said: He is very unlikable for some reason. He seems like a sneaky little dude. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/d7/57/1b/d7571bae5dc338621cb316d02bc4ed7b.jpg That says it all, really. How you gonna be flexin when dudes around you have biceps bigger than both of yours put together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 15 hours ago, Red Tiger said: Bill Russell, the cornerstone of the Celtics Dynasty: 102 Excuse me while I vomit. Meanwhile Brook Lopez, legend of the game, is ranked 49. 13 hours ago, sperry said: PER is a very good stat. It's not the end all be all, and anyone who argues otherwise is just being foolish. Nor would people who understand the stats make that argument. See above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinker Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 PER only measures offensive impact. It will not measure the impact of great defenders at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 7 hours ago, Tywin et al. said: Meanwhile Brook Lopez, legend of the game, is ranked 49. See above. So some dipshit you got in an argument with at a bar thought that a 2 point difference in PER was a line in the sand? Ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 32 minutes ago, sperry said: So some dipshit you got in an argument with at a bar thought that a 2 point difference in PER was a line in the sand? Ok? No, it was the top beat writer covering the Nuggets for the Denver post. He wrote the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.