| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Villain6Activated
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 6697
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: | So if everything wasn't so hell bent on Ingram being a second option, do you guys think his FG% rebounds and assists would go up? I think so
|
No. He's having trouble against 2nd tier defenders in Iso already. Imagine 1st tier. |
Wait what? If he wasn’t so he’ll bent on being a second option he wouldn’t be going iso against first or second tier defenders, what do you mean. He’d be playing more of a point guard role full time and take shots within the offense. Even if his PPG went down his efficiency and assists would go up. I don’t understand your logic at all
_________________
“Life is too short. You have to keep it moving.” - Kobe |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 1ngr4m wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: | So if everything wasn't so hell bent on Ingram being a second option, do you guys think his FG% rebounds and assists would go up? I think so
|
No. He's having trouble against 2nd tier defenders in Iso already. Imagine 1st tier. |
Wait what? If he wasn’t so he’ll bent on being a second option he wouldn’t be going iso against first or second tier defenders, what do you mean. He’d be playing more of a point guard role full time and take shots within the offense. Even if his PPG went down his efficiency and assists would go up. I don’t understand your logic at all |
Can someone elaborate? When he goes ISO, is that the offense? If so, I guess the statement is true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Villain6Activated
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 6697
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | | 1ngr4m wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: | So if everything wasn't so hell bent on Ingram being a second option, do you guys think his FG% rebounds and assists would go up? I think so
|
No. He's having trouble against 2nd tier defenders in Iso already. Imagine 1st tier. |
Wait what? If he wasn’t so he’ll bent on being a second option he wouldn’t be going iso against first or second tier defenders, what do you mean. He’d be playing more of a point guard role full time and take shots within the offense. Even if his PPG went down his efficiency and assists would go up. I don’t understand your logic at all |
Can someone elaborate? When he goes ISO, is that the offense? If so, I guess the statement is true. |
If that’s part of the offense it’s probably because they fancy him to be the second option which goes back to my original point.
If it’s not then they’re doing a god awful job of controlling BI or he’s just uncoachable lol
_________________
“Life is too short. You have to keep it moving.” - Kobe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yellow
Starting Rotation
Joined: 31 Oct 2018
Posts: 265
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
ESPN's Real Plus-Minus came out today.
Ingram's real plus-minus is currently -3.08. For reference sake, among 83 small forwards, Ingram is ranked 78 of 83. He's ahead of Jonathan Simmons, Kevin Knox, Mario Hezonja, Cedi Osman, and Josh Jackson.
Among SGs, Ingram would rank 94 of 99.
FWIW, Kuzma is ranked as the 87th PF out of 91. He has a score of -2.55. He's ahead of three rookies and Jabari Parker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yellow wrote: | ESPN's Real Plus-Minus came out today.
Ingram's real plus-minus is currently -3.08. For reference sake, among 83 small forwards, Ingram is ranked 78 of 83. He's ahead of Jonathan Simmons, Kevin Knox, Mario Hezonja, Cedi Osman, and Josh Jackson.
Among SGs, Ingram would rank 94 of 99.
FWIW, Kuzma is ranked as the 87th PF out of 91. He has a score of -2.55. He's ahead of three rookies and Jabari Parker. |
Pretty much they both sucked early on.
Lebron #1 SF at 5.95  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRoost
Star Player
Joined: 21 Mar 2017
Posts: 4794
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yellow wrote: | ESPN's Real Plus-Minus came out today.
Ingram's real plus-minus is currently -3.08. For reference sake, among 83 small forwards, Ingram is ranked 78 of 83. He's ahead of Jonathan Simmons, Kevin Knox, Mario Hezonja, Cedi Osman, and Josh Jackson.
Among SGs, Ingram would rank 94 of 99.
FWIW, Kuzma is ranked as the 87th PF out of 91. He has a score of -2.55. He's ahead of three rookies and Jabari Parker. |
That’s really bad . Offensively he has a lot of work to do. His dprm is not matching my eye test though except Ingram has trouble with screens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Villain6Activated
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 6697
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | | Yellow wrote: | ESPN's Real Plus-Minus came out today.
Ingram's real plus-minus is currently -3.08. For reference sake, among 83 small forwards, Ingram is ranked 78 of 83. He's ahead of Jonathan Simmons, Kevin Knox, Mario Hezonja, Cedi Osman, and Josh Jackson.
Among SGs, Ingram would rank 94 of 99.
FWIW, Kuzma is ranked as the 87th PF out of 91. He has a score of -2.55. He's ahead of three rookies and Jabari Parker. |
Pretty much they both sucked early on.
Lebron #1 SF at 5.95 |
Damn so basically our forward rotation is: the best and two of the worst. lol
_________________
“Life is too short. You have to keep it moving.” - Kobe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If people made actual trades based on Real Plus Minus then let me at them.
Michael Beasley is 38 on the list... how can you take this stat seriously? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkwilkes
Star Player
Joined: 15 Jul 2002
Posts: 6938
Location: searching for the mojo of Dr. Buss
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BI is disappointing me this season. No growth. In fact, I thought he looked much better last season if I'm honest.
For a guy who has the natural talent and body, he's doing very little with it right now.
_________________
"He may say it's not you, it's him.... but it's really you." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | If people made actual trades based on Real Plus Minus then let me at them.
Michael Beasley is 38 on the list... how can you take this stat seriously? |
Well. All you have to do is filter in minutes per game and you take out the anomalies (due to minutes played)?
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | If people made actual trades based on Real Plus Minus then let me at them.
Michael Beasley is 38 on the list... how can you take this stat seriously? |
Well. All you have to do is filter in minutes per game and you take out the anomalies (due to minutes played)? |
Rudy Gay is the 7th best small forward?
It's a fun stat but seems to be a lot of false correlations between placement and actual effect on the league.
I wouldn't make trades based on those numbers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
levon
Franchise Player
Joined: 11 Oct 2016
Posts: 10602
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RPM is one of the best stats out there, but you have to contextualize by role. Obviously minutes and roles are correlated, but you wanna compare players doing similar things in terms of frequency with RPM. It's not meant to be taken globally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | If people made actual trades based on Real Plus Minus then let me at them.
Michael Beasley is 38 on the list... how can you take this stat seriously? |
Well. All you have to do is filter in minutes per game and you take out the anomalies (due to minutes played)? |
Rudy Gay is the 7th best small forward?
It's a fun stat but seems to be a lot of false correlations between placement and actual effect on the league.
I wouldn't make trades based on those numbers. |
Please give us your alternate stats criteria (besides being an injured former all star  )
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yet Gallinari, Rudy Gay, Covington, Joe Harris are ranked above Kawhi Leonard.
It's not much better than a magic 8 ball |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | If people made actual trades based on Real Plus Minus then let me at them.
Michael Beasley is 38 on the list... how can you take this stat seriously? |
Well. All you have to do is filter in minutes per game and you take out the anomalies (due to minutes played)? |
Rudy Gay is the 7th best small forward?
It's a fun stat but seems to be a lot of false correlations between placement and actual effect on the league.
I wouldn't make trades based on those numbers. |
It's early.
I mean Rudy Gay is shooting 50% from 3, with 14/7 in 27 mins.
His production has been positive as of now.
His drpm is 2.51 which is crazy.
I'd think it moves towards 0 as the season moves on.
He was #22 last year at only 0.27 rpm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's better than comparing raw FG%.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRoost wrote: | | Yellow wrote: | ESPN's Real Plus-Minus came out today.
Ingram's real plus-minus is currently -3.08. For reference sake, among 83 small forwards, Ingram is ranked 78 of 83. He's ahead of Jonathan Simmons, Kevin Knox, Mario Hezonja, Cedi Osman, and Josh Jackson.
Among SGs, Ingram would rank 94 of 99.
FWIW, Kuzma is ranked as the 87th PF out of 91. He has a score of -2.55. He's ahead of three rookies and Jabari Parker. |
That’s really bad . Offensively he has a lot of work to do. His dprm is not matching my eye test though except Ingram has trouble with screens. |
Last night was a great example of his issues defensively at the 2. He gets wiped out by even the slightest contact on screens, and then has to scramble and hope his length is enough to get back into the play. To his credit, I think he does try hard.
Last edited by greenfrog on Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's better than comparing mid range FG%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRoost
Star Player
Joined: 21 Mar 2017
Posts: 4794
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | If people made actual trades based on Real Plus Minus then let me at them.
Michael Beasley is 38 on the list... how can you take this stat seriously? |
Well. All you have to do is filter in minutes per game and you take out the anomalies (due to minutes played)? |
Rudy Gay is the 7th best small forward?
It's a fun stat but seems to be a lot of false correlations between placement and actual effect on the league.
I wouldn't make trades based on those numbers. |
There are some outliers but it’s usually matching my eye test especially for players who are in rotation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| levon wrote: | | RPM is one of the best stats out there, but you have to contextualize by role. Obviously minutes and roles are correlated, but you wanna compare players doing similar things in terms of frequency with RPM. It's not meant to be taken globally. |
Bu-but it's ESPN (i.e. fake news, the devil). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| greenfrog wrote: | | CRoost wrote: | | Yellow wrote: | ESPN's Real Plus-Minus came out today.
Ingram's real plus-minus is currently -3.08. For reference sake, among 83 small forwards, Ingram is ranked 78 of 83. He's ahead of Jonathan Simmons, Kevin Knox, Mario Hezonja, Cedi Osman, and Josh Jackson.
Among SGs, Ingram would rank 94 of 99.
FWIW, Kuzma is ranked as the 87th PF out of 91. He has a score of -2.55. He's ahead of three rookies and Jabari Parker. |
That’s really bad . Offensively he has a lot of work to do. His dprm is not matching my eye test though except Ingram has trouble with screens. |
Last night was a great example of his issues defensively at the 2. He's gets wiped out by even the slightest contact on screens, and then has to scramble and hope his length is enough to get back into the play. To his credit, I think he does try hard. |
I mean, it's almost every game he has to guard an active 2. Same thing happens against Portland. It's not my favorite position for him to play. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | | It's better than comparing mid range FG%. |
Yup. Every composite stat has a flaw (remember when PER was the all encompassing stat?). But RPM isn't a bad start. I'm not a stats-geek so I defer to guys like GT/Tox but it's a starting point to discuss players' efficacy on the court.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | It's better than comparing raw FG%. |
The Warriors have the best FG% and until the implosion, were considered the best team. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26309
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| silkwilkes wrote: | BI is disappointing me this season. No growth. In fact, I thought he looked much better last season if I'm honest.
|
you mean when he was playing his natural position?
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | epak wrote: | | It's better than comparing mid range FG%. |
Yup. Every composite stat has a flaw (remember when PER was the all encompassing stat?). But RPM isn't a bad start. I'm not a stats-geek so I defer to guys like GT/Tox but it's a starting point to discuss players' efficacy on the court. |
Epak is just being facetious as you were... but when I presented midrange... it was in response to people declaring BI unfit to start or keep.
They were complaining about his midrange... yet his midrange compares favorably to hall of famers.
His problem is he needs to finish at the rim more, and take more threes.
McGee and Kuz have taken the rim opportunities so that only leaves the three which unfortunately he's not good at yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
