| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Afrosho
Starting Rotation
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 665
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | MPG by Month
October: 31.7
November: 34.8
December: 36.6
He may well get to that 20ppg mark by February or March after all. In 42mpg. |
On a 36mn basis, we are still talking about a +5.3ppg improvement between this season and the previous one (going from 40%FG to 45% too).
Very impressive.
Last edited by Afrosho on Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSD wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | MPG by Month
October: 31.7
November: 34.8
December: 36.6
He may well get to that 20ppg mark by February or March after all. In 42mpg. |
I think this is Ingram’s own doing tbh. For example, the Cleveland game was a good example...doing well, flow of the game...then in the 4th he just gets passive and hangs out. It’s kind of what happens with Lonzo too. Lonzo kills it in the 3rd quarter at MSG but then he hangs back 4th.
Imo Ingram being able to crack 20 ppg and consistently score say 22-26 ppg as his career progresses will depend on a) his 3 point shooting and b) his free throw shooting. |
Honestly, who cares if he cracks 20 ppg? He's at 16.2 right now and he's bottom-10 ORPM by position. Thank God he's not Josh Jackson, but 20 ppg is not a good shorthand for him actually being a plus player offensively. Especially if he's currently at 51.8% TS%.
As has been said many times, it all rests on whether he can make jump shots consistently (and no, 34.5% is not good when your 3Ar is 0.128). 16 ppg, but hitting 38% of 3s and playing well off ball next to LeBron and Paul George >>>>> 22 ppg on 51% TS% by ball stopping and attacking the rim incessantly.
That's why the Cavs game was so beautiful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | silkwilkes wrote: | If he's that fit that he can play so many minutes and not foul out, more power to him... most guys can't handle it.
He's finishing games strong too. |
I agree.. hard to believe one would even attempt to construct a narrative around a players minutes per game. smh |
What's the narrative? That guys score more when they play more minutes? That's as obvious of a point as can be.
Ingram plays 31.7 mpg in October, averages 14.4 ppg (50.3 TS%)
Ingram plays 34.8 mpg in November, averages 16.3 ppg (53.7 TS%)
Ingram plays 36.6 mpg in December, averages 18.0 ppg (49.4 TS%)
I don't understand why this bothers you so much. |
Well it's silly to me for obvious reasons.. A players ability to score is more of a product of that players skill level not the minutes they're playing. You could have given him the same amount of minutes last season and seen different results. Or any other player for that matter. You score with skill, not minutes. The minutes give said player an opportunity, the skill is what produces the numbers.
So yea, it's pretty silly.. but you can keep believing that if you want.
And it's not a matter of it bothering me so much.. Most of the posters in here didn't agree with you when you posted this before, including other mods.. =) |
Most of the posters here don't agree that if you give the same guy more minutes, he'd score more points? You sure about that? His PPG went up as his minutes went up last year too.
This is a Top 5 "weirdest disagreement" I've ever had on LG. |
Maybe you need to refresh your memory of what happened when you brought this up before. There was plenty of push back. Very few who actually agreed with you, in regards to Ingram.
And I agree it is a weird exchange.. but I suppose one could expect anything in Ingram's thread. =)
You are trying to attribute Ingram's improved scoring to more minutes. My argument is skill produces more points. More minutes will simply provide an opportunity. This should be pretty simple to understand.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Afrosho wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | MPG by Month
October: 31.7
November: 34.8
December: 36.6
He may well get to that 20ppg mark by February or March after all. In 42mpg. |
On a 36mn basis, we are still talking about a +5.3ppg improvement between this season and the previous one (going from 40%FG to 45% too).
Very impressive. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Afrosho wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | MPG by Month
October: 31.7
November: 34.8
December: 36.6
He may well get to that 20ppg mark by February or March after all. In 42mpg. |
On a 36mn basis, we are still talking about a +5.3ppg improvment between this season and the previous one (going from 40%FG to 45% too).
Very impressive. |
For sure. More specifically...
Per 36 Minutes
October, 2016......14.9 (50.6 TS%, 3 games)
November, 2016...10.4 (45.0 TS%)
December, 2016.....8.6 (39.9 TS%)
January, 2017......11.5 (47.5 TS%)
February, 2017.....11.8 (50.6 TS%)
March, 2017.........13.7 (56.0 TS%)
April, 2017...........18.9 (46.6 TS%)
October, 2017.......16.4 (50.3 TS%)
November, 2017....16.9 (53.7 TS%)
December, 2017....17.7 (49.4 TS%) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pio2u
Retired Number
Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 54623
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | silkwilkes wrote: | If he's that fit that he can play so many minutes and not foul out, more power to him... most guys can't handle it.
He's finishing games strong too. |
I agree.. hard to believe one would even attempt to construct a narrative around a players minutes per game. smh |
What's the narrative? That guys score more when they play more minutes? That's as obvious of a point as can be.
Ingram plays 31.7 mpg in October, averages 14.4 ppg (50.3 TS%)
Ingram plays 34.8 mpg in November, averages 16.3 ppg (53.7 TS%)
Ingram plays 36.6 mpg in December, averages 18.0 ppg (49.4 TS%)
I don't understand why this bothers you so much. |
Well it's silly to me for obvious reasons.. A players ability to score is more of a product of that players skill level not the minutes they're playing. You could have given him the same amount of minutes last season and seen different results. Or any other player for that matter. You score with skill, not minutes. The minutes give said player an opportunity, the skill is what produces the numbers.
So yea, it's pretty silly.. but you can keep believing that if you want.
And it's not a matter of it bothering me so much.. Most of the posters in here didn't agree with you when you posted this before, including other mods.. =) |
Most of the posters here don't agree that if you give the same guy more minutes, he'd score more points? You sure about that? His PPG went up as his minutes went up last year too.
This is a Top 5 "weirdest disagreement" I've ever had on LG. |
Maybe you need to refresh your memory of what happened when you brought this up before. There was plenty of push back. Very few who actually agreed with you, in regards to Ingram.
And I agree it is a weird exchange.. but I suppose one could expect anything in Ingram's thread. =)
You are trying to attribute Ingram's improved scoring to more minutes. My argument is skill produces more points. More minutes will simply provide an opportunity. This should be pretty simple to understand.. |
If a player gets 100 opportunities to score, do you think that player is going to score more, fewer, or the same number of points in aggregate than they would if they had 50 opportunities? Are you serious with this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | silkwilkes wrote: | If he's that fit that he can play so many minutes and not foul out, more power to him... most guys can't handle it.
He's finishing games strong too. |
I agree.. hard to believe one would even attempt to construct a narrative around a players minutes per game. smh |
What's the narrative? That guys score more when they play more minutes? That's as obvious of a point as can be.
Ingram plays 31.7 mpg in October, averages 14.4 ppg (50.3 TS%)
Ingram plays 34.8 mpg in November, averages 16.3 ppg (53.7 TS%)
Ingram plays 36.6 mpg in December, averages 18.0 ppg (49.4 TS%)
I don't understand why this bothers you so much. |
Well it's silly to me for obvious reasons.. A players ability to score is more of a product of that players skill level not the minutes they're playing. You could have given him the same amount of minutes last season and seen different results. Or any other player for that matter. You score with skill, not minutes. The minutes give said player an opportunity, the skill is what produces the numbers.
So yea, it's pretty silly.. but you can keep believing that if you want.
And it's not a matter of it bothering me so much.. Most of the posters in here didn't agree with you when you posted this before, including other mods.. =) |
Most of the posters here don't agree that if you give the same guy more minutes, he'd score more points? You sure about that? His PPG went up as his minutes went up last year too.
This is a Top 5 "weirdest disagreement" I've ever had on LG. |
Maybe you need to refresh your memory of what happened when you brought this up before. There was plenty of push back. Very few who actually agreed with you, in regards to Ingram.
And I agree it is a weird exchange.. but I suppose one could expect anything in Ingram's thread. =)
You are trying to attribute Ingram's improved scoring to more minutes. My argument is skill produces more points. More minutes will simply provide an opportunity. This should be pretty simple to understand.. |
If a player gets 100 opportunities to score, do you think that player is going to score more, fewer, or the same number of points in aggregate than they would if they had 50 opportunities? Are you serious with this? |
We're not going to agree on this.. what you're saying makes no sense in regards to Ingram. He's an improved player period.
If you want to attribute it to more minutes so be it.. We've already been over this. Skill correlates more to production than minutes. Think what you want though. We don't have to agree, it's okay if I think it's absurd, just as it's okay if you think it odd that I don't agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And out of curiosity are you offended personally by our exchange or feel I have attacked you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 10758
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | | And out of curiosity are you offended personally by our exchange or feel I have attacked you? |
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
55
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 12092
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So what happens next year when he averages 25 points instead of 18 in the same 36 minutes he's getting now? The added minutes argument wont work anymore.
He's a better scorer now than he was at the beginning of the season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | We're not going to agree on this.. what you're saying makes no sense in regards to Ingram. He's an improved player period.
If you want to attribute it to more minutes so be it.. We've already been over this. Skill correlates more to production than minutes. Think what you want though. We don't have to agree, it's okay if I think it's absurd, just as it's okay if you think it odd that I don't agree. |
Of course he's improved, that isn't the argument. Him being improved is irrelevant to the fact he scores more when he gets more minutes, just like every other player in the history of the NBA.
He scores less than he plays 29-30 mpg than he does when he plays 36-37. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 55 wrote: | So what happens next year when he averages 25 points instead of 18 in the same 36 minutes he's getting now? The added minutes argument wont work anymore.
He's a better scorer now than he was at the beginning of the season. |
Then why isn't that reflected in his scoring numbers?
He's shooting more, in more minutes, and less efficiently in December than he was in October & November. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 10758
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What GT seems to be saying is that Ingram's improvement in ppg is not disproportionate to the increased number of minutes he is getting. In other words, when taking into account the increase in minutes, the increase in ppg and the TS%, it's likely that the explanation for the increase in ppg is due to the increase in minutes rather than him being improved/more efficient.
Were his ppg and TS% higher (how much higher is of course up for debate), then I assume GT would agree that you could attribute it more to improvement/efficiency rather than more minutes. But the fact that his TS% is down does help his argument.
I think the key factors are the TS% and the proportionality.
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way
Last edited by PHILosophize on Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26386
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 55 wrote: | | So what happens next year when he averages 25 points instead of 18 in the same 36 minutes he's getting now? The added minutes argument wont work anymore. |
it will mean he's gotten more efficient as a scorer.
But where he currently is now, more minutes are going to mean more points and more opportunities to score.
Ingram in 35 minutes scoring in his 2nd season vs Ingram in 35 minutes scoring in his 3rd season doesn't mean that the "minutes didn't matter". It means that he became a more efficient scorer.
if Ingram scores 17 ppg this year in 36 minutes while shooting 44% from the field and 33% from three
Is it that implausible that he would score more points in 36 minutes the next year if he's shooting 47% from the field and 37% from three and thus making and getting even more shot opportunities because of his increased efficiency in scoring?
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PHILosophize wrote: | What GT seems to be saying is that Ingram's improvement in ppg is not disproportionate to the increased number of minutes he is getting. In other words, when taking into account the increase in minutes, the increase in ppg and the TS%, it's likely that the explanation for the increase in ppg is due to the increase in minutes rather than him being improved/more efficient.
Were his ppg and TS% higher (how much higher is of course up for debate), then I assume GT would agree that you could attribute it more to improvement/efficiency rather than more minutes. But the fact that his TS% is down does help his argument.
I think the key factors are the TS% and the proportionality. |
I understand GT.. he's always clear in what he's communicating. I just don't agree with what he's saying.. And that's cool. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KeepItRealOrElse
Retired Number
Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 32767
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
People just assume that you're giving no credit to Ingram, GTizzle. It's just the nature of typing stuff out over the Internet - if you don't lay your wholllle viewpoint out (shoutout MJST), people jump to assumptions. Nuance seeing both sides of the coin, never gets assumed.
I've done this to SoCalDevan in this thread - just assumed he's 100% on the positive side of the fence all the time. It's not true for him and the opposite isn't true for you. Sure it happens to me as well (I don't hate Randle!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | We're not going to agree on this.. what you're saying makes no sense in regards to Ingram. He's an improved player period.
If you want to attribute it to more minutes so be it.. We've already been over this. Skill correlates more to production than minutes. Think what you want though. We don't have to agree, it's okay if I think it's absurd, just as it's okay if you think it odd that I don't agree. |
Of course he's improved, that isn't the argument. Him being improved is irrelevant to the fact he scores more when he gets more minutes, just like every other player in the history of the NBA.
He scores less than he plays 29-30 mpg than he does when he plays 36-37. |
On the surface that argument has merit.. It doesn't account for variables.
Some players will put up more field goal attempts than others. Some will adjust how much they shoot based on how many minutes they know they're going to play, some wont. Some players will see a dip in fg% with an increase in fg attempts, which would lend credibility to the case you're making.
And of course he will score more if given more minutes to do so. My argument is that his increase in production should be attributed to his development. Minutes equal opportunity... Skill equals production... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Clarkson scores 14.9 ppg in 22.6 mpg. You don't think he'd score more if he played 34.4 mpg? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26386
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | Clarkson scores 14.9 ppg in 22.6 mpg. You don't think he'd score more if he played 34.4 mpg? |
When it comes to Ingram and any kind of criticism, even if you're giving credit, it seems best to follow Obi-Wan's advice from a new hope.
"It'd be as well to let it go. It's too far out of range."
-Obi-Wan Kenobi
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | Clarkson scores 14.9 ppg in 22.6 mpg. You don't think he'd score more if he played 34.4 mpg? |
Sure he would.. He's a skilled scorer, an aggressive one as well.
Let's frame that around production and whether or not it adds value to the team.
Replace Clakrson with Bogut or Brewer.. Would more minutes equate to more production? Would an increase in shot attempts from either of those two benefit the team?
Your argument on the surface is valid if applied to specific players. I don't believe it is as a blanket statement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 10758
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whether it benefits the team is an entirely different subject. But all of these players are in the NBA; they have skill. So if you give virtually any of them more minutes, they are likely to have increased production.
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PHILosophize wrote: | | Whether it benefits the team is an entirely different subject. But all of these players are in the NBA; they have skill. So if you give virtually any of them more minutes, they are likely to have increased production. |
No.. lol Just no.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26386
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | Clarkson scores 14.9 ppg in 22.6 mpg. You don't think he'd score more if he played 34.4 mpg? |
Sure he would.. He's a skilled scorer, an aggressive one as well.
Let's frame that around production and whether or not it adds value to the team.
Replace Clakrson with Bogut or Brewer.. Would more minutes equate to more production? Would an increase in shot attempts from either of those two benefit the team?
Your argument on the surface is valid if applied to specific players. I don't believe it is as a blanket statement. |
See your argument is flawed because you aren't taking role into the equation.
With Bogut or Brewer, extended minutes means there's potential for more shot opportunities but they aren't going to be running plays through them, because they don't run plays through them because that isn't their role whatsoever. They'll likely get more shots, but that's a product of them being out there longer(which is a point for GT)
But also Ingram's role on the team, he's going to have more offense ran through him as thats his role on the team. So yes, more minutes will mean more shot opportunities which will mean more scoring.
He could get the same minutes and same shot opportunities a year from now and score more because he's increased his efficiency as a scorer as well.
So again, GT's point stands.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 10758
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | | PHILosophize wrote: | | Whether it benefits the team is an entirely different subject. But all of these players are in the NBA; they have skill. So if you give virtually any of them more minutes, they are likely to have increased production. |
No.. lol Just no.. |
Let's say our starting lineup was:
Caruso
Blue
Brewer
Deng
Bogut
Are you saying that with that lineup we would basically get shutout every game and that nobody would get any rebounds or assists?
Edit: Actually, I don't even need to go that far. Are you saying that they wouldn't have increased production compared to their averages right now?
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
