Clutch is Overrated!!!

#102
#102
Spartacavolus said:
I don't even know what the argument is. I think he even said that MJ would still be the greatest of all time if he never put up any stats, but that we only know he is the greatest because he blew it up and scored 60 a couple of times.

This should be in the philosophy forum.
Click to expand...

In terms of talent. If he takes 5 shots, he's still the same talent that he is when he's taking 25 shots. Am I speaking a different language?

In other words. His # of shots doesn't determine his talent, but we would've never known how talented he was had he not taken 20 shot per game. We would've undervalued him.

Statistics have found that guys who take more shots tend to be overvalued.
 
#103
#103
nbakerld said:
In terms of talent. If he takes 5 shots, he's still the same talent that he is when he's taking 25 shots. Am I speaking a different language?

In other words. His # of shots doesn't determine his talent, but we would've never known how talented he was had he not taken 20 shot per game. We would've undervalued him.

Statistics have found that guys who take more shots tend to be overvalued.
Click to expand...

Players that take more shots usually do so for a reason. If they shouldn't be taking more shots, they will find themselves on the bench. Coachs want the talented players taking shots.
 
Last edited:
#104
#104
Volsbackto1998 said:
Players that take more shots usually do so for a reason. If they shouldn't be taking more shots, they will find themselves on the bench. Coach's want the talented players taking shots.
Click to expand...

But coaches are often horrible judges of talent, IMO. So are GM's. You are assuming they are good at allocating shots to their players. And again scoring isn't everything.

A SG that only takes 10 shots and scores 15 points per game might be the best SG in the league (he could be an elite defender, distributor, and rebounder), but nobody would accept him as the best SG in the league unless he were scoring 25 or so per game.
 
#105
#105
nbakerld said:
But coaches are often horrible judges of talent, IMO. So are GM's. You are assuming they are good at allocating shots to their players. And again scoring isn't everything.

A SG that only takes 10 shots and scores 15 points per game might be the best SG in the league (he could be an elite defender, distributor, and rebounder), but nobody would accept him as the best SG in the league unless he were scoring 25 or so per game.
Click to expand...

:lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::crazy:
You should be the coach and GM. Bring your stat sheet with you.
If he can't score without being wide open he won't be considered to be the best in the league because there are others that can - like Kobe.
 
#106
#106
Volsbackto1998 said:
Players that take more shots usually do so for a reason. If they shouldn't be taking more shots, they will find themselves on the bench. Coachs want the talented players taking shots.
Click to expand...

You FYP'd? I don't think that's true, and it's another unfounded assumption. If this were true, then basically you are saying nobody shoots too much because nobody ever gets benched for shooting too much.

IMO, Montae Ellis clearly shoots too much, and I think most people would agree. 2 years ago he was taking 22 shots per game and shooting well below league average. He never got benched.
 
#107
#107
Volsbackto1998 said:
:lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::lolabove::crazy:
You should be the coach and GM. Bring your stat sheet with you.
If he can't score without being wide open he won't be considered to be the best in the league because there are others that can - like Kobe.
Click to expand...

You think coaches and GM's are good judges of talent? Let's look at success rates for lottery picks.

My Jazz selected Gordon Hayward 30 something picks before Landry Fields. This is the most retarded move in the world, and stats would've avoided it, but this is how the league is run.
 
#108
#108
nbakerld said:
You think coaches and GM's are good judges of talent? Let's look at success rates for lottery picks.

My Jazz selected Gordon Hayward 30 something picks before Landry Fields. This is the most retarded move in the world, and stats would've avoided it, but this is how the league is run.
Click to expand...

The draft is one thing the players on your team is another. The coachs know who can play and who can't. If Kobe couldn't create shots for himself and others he wouldn't be playing the role he plays.
 
#109
#109
Volsbackto1998 said:
The draft is one thing the players on your team is another. The coachs know who can play and who can't. If Kobe couldn't create shots for himself and others he wouldn't be playing the role he plays.
Click to expand...

So how come Jeremy Lin was buried on the bench for 2 years? Marc Jackson and D'antoni (Anthony suggested playing him) both failed to see his talent.
 
#110
#110
nbakerld said:
You're gonna go there? Your stubborn assumption that Kobe's shot-taking rate increases is an indictment that you are intellectually challenged. I wasn't gonna say it.
Click to expand...

I'm not even sure what we're arguing about. . . And won't comment on the second part.
 
#111
#111
nbakerld said:
So how come Jeremy Lin was buried on the bench for 2 years? Marc Jackson and D'antoni (Anthony suggested playing him) both failed to see his talent.
Click to expand...

He won't stand the test of time. Look what Miami did to him. 1 for 11. His time is done. You like him taking all his shots but have a problem with Kobe taking them? Last 5 games Kobe has the better FG%. You do like stats don't you?:eek:lol:
 
#112
#112
Speaking of Miami, if you don't think being relied upon to take the tough shots will affect your FG% than take a look at Miami. After Dwade and Lebron got together, both their FG% increased. It is clear that is because they now share the load of tough shots. The sky is blue.
 
#114
#114
Volsbackto1998 said:
He won't stand the test of time. Look what Miami did to him. 1 for 11. His time is done. You like him taking all his shots but have a problem with Kobe taking them? Last 5 games Kobe has the better FG%. You do like stats don't you?:eek:lol:
Click to expand...

I like advanced stats. FG% doesn't tell us much.
 
#115
#115
Volsbackto1998 said:
Watch games and think with your brain not solely stat sheets.
Click to expand...

I watch a lot of NBA, and you know what I found out? You can watch, but no matter what you see you will convince yourself to confirm whatever you believe. If you hate Lebron and see him make a game-winner you'll still believe he's a choker. If you like Kobe and see him miss a game-winner, you'll still think he's clutch. You rely on the events that confirm what you believe and disregard the events that don't.

This is how you all look at stats. You rely on the stats that confirm what you believe and disregard the stats that don't.
 
#116
#116
So if PPG is the end all be all in evaluating players why hasn't Monte Ellis been put selected as an All-Star? He's about as gifted a scorer as there is in the league. Its not all about how much someone scores, its about what someone does in the playoffs. Its about winning. Kobe has gotten the job in the postseason on multiple occasions and that's why he is held in such high regard. He's a winner, end of story.
 
#117
#117
Train23 said:
So if PPG is the end all be all in evaluating players why hasn't Monte Ellis been put selected as an All-Star? He's about as gifted a scorer as there is in the league. Its not all about how much someone scores, its about what someone does in the playoffs. Its about winning. Kobe has gotten the job in the postseason on multiple occasions and that's why he is held in such high regard. He's a winner, end of story.
Click to expand...

Getting to an all-star game has a lot to do with your market.

There's only 1 SG on the West in the All-Star game, and his 27 per game trumps Ellis' 22 per game. The other score first guard on the roster is Westbrook, who also is outscoring Ellis.

That being said, both of those players are better than Ellis.
 
#118
#118
Also let me clarify something....

I don't mean to make scoring out as the end all be all for most of basketball establishment. I'm oversimplifying it a bit. It's scoring + winning, and if you are a PG it's scoring + assists + winning. If you are a big it's scoring + rebounding + winning (but rebounding is still undervalued).

Every year GM's take gambles on players from winning teams (if you're the leading scorer on a final 4 team, you're odds of being a lottery pick are very good). Picks like Gordon Hayward happen almost every year. A guy that never should have been lottery, and he never would have been had he not played in the final 4.
 
#119
#119
nbakerld said:
Also let me clarify something....

I don't mean to make scoring out as the end all be all for most of basketball establishment. I'm oversimplifying it a bit. It's scoring + winning, and if you are a PG it's scoring + assists + winning. If you are a big it's scoring + rebounding + winning (but rebounding is still undervalued).

Every year GM's take gambles on players from winning teams (if you're the leading scorer on a final 4 team, you're odds of being a lottery pick are very good). Picks like Gordon Hayward happen almost every year. A guy that never should have been lottery, and he never would have been had he not played in the final 4.
Click to expand...

Other than defense, what else do you want your SG's to do? That's the traditional role of a SG, scoring. That is why SG's who score are usually highly regarded.
 
#120
#120
Train23 said:
Other than defense, what else do you want your SG's to do? That's the traditional role of a SG, scoring. That is why SG's who score are usually highly regarded.
Click to expand...

I think people think that because their name is "shooting" guard. You shouldn't expect 10 rpg from a SG, but you should want one that gets 6 rpg as opposed to 4 rpg. You should want a SG that is a good distributor. I don't think SG's necessarily have a tendency to score more than forwards.
 
#121
#121
nbakerld said:
I think people think that because their name is "shooting" guard. You shouldn't expect 10 rpg from a SG, but you should want one that gets 6 rpg as opposed to 4 rpg. You should want a SG that is a good distributor. I don't think SG's necessarily have a tendency to score more than forwards.
Click to expand...

4 rpg or 6 rpg. What if one SG get 4 rebounds because Dwight Howard is his center and one SG gets 6 rebounds because Andrea bargiannia (I'm aware I butchered the spelling but you get the point) is his center.

What you are failing to take into consideration is the construction of teams and the roles they play. I watched Pau in Memphis. He isn't "the man" and never could be "the man" on a team going anywhere. Kobe makes Pau's life easy. That is so blatantly obvious it's laughable what you're trying to suggest and as someone who loves basketball I find it borderline offensive. Kobe is an alpha male. You have to have one to win. There's a difference in shooting 60% on a handful of shots playing a secondary role and knowing you have to bring it (scoring) every night as the focus of your team, the media, opposing defenses, fans, etc.
 
#122
#122
TBrown said:
4 rpg or 6 rpg. What if one SG get 4 rebounds because Dwight Howard is his center and one SG gets 6 rebounds because Andrea bargiannia (I'm aware I butchered the spelling but you get the point) is his center.

What you are failing to take into consideration is the construction of teams and the roles they play. I watched Pau in Memphis. He isn't "the man" and never could be "the man" on a team going anywhere. Kobe makes Pau's life easy. That is so blatantly obvious it's laughable what you're trying to suggest and as someone who loves basketball I find it borderline offensive. Kobe is an alpha male. You have to have one to win. There's a difference in shooting 60% on a handful of shots playing a secondary role and knowing you have to bring it (scoring) every night as the focus of your team, the media, opposing defenses, fans, etc.
Click to expand...

Just cause Howard is getting rebounds, doesn't necessarily mean his SG's numbers are going to take a hit. Michael Jordan averaged 6.4 rpg in '92, 6.7 rpg in '93. Then they added the greatest rebounder of all time and MJ got 6.6 rpg.
 
#123
#123
And here's a great case study.

Dwyane Wade averaged 6.2 rpg per 36 minutes last year. With Haslem healthy this year, they don't need him to rebound as much. This has freed Wade up to be productive in other areas:

(Per 36)
'11 = 24.7 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.4 spg, 1.1 bpg
'12 = 25.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.9 spg, 1.6 bpg

So advanced stats will tell you he's basically the same player as last year, even if someone is cutting into his rebounding totals.
 
#124
#124
This is the exact same **** I was saying to you in my previous post without quoting "advanced statistics." your other post is completely contradictory to this post. Also, since you like stats so much I'm sure you're aware if the term outlier. Does being the greatest basketball player in the history of ever make one an outlier? I'd say yes but without 46 case studies in front of me I cannot be sure.

nbakerld said:
And here's a great case study.

Dwyane Wade averaged 6.2 rpg per 36 minutes last year. With Haslem healthy this year, they don't need him to rebound as much. This has freed Wade up to be productive in other areas:

(Per 36)
'11 = 24.7 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.4 spg, 1.1 bpg
'12 = 25.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.9 spg, 1.6 bpg

So advanced stats will tell you he's basically the same player as last year, even if someone is cutting into his rebounding totals.
Click to expand...
 
#125
#125
TBrown said:
This is the exact same **** I was saying to you in my previous post without quoting "advanced statistics." your other post is completely contradictory to this post. Also, since you like stats so much I'm sure you're aware if the term outlier. Does being the greatest basketball player in the history of ever make one an outlier? I'd say yes but without 46 case studies in front of me I cannot be sure.
Click to expand...

Kind of incoherent. I'm not really sure what a lot of that is supposed to mean.

If you're looking at the all-time distribution of NBA talent, yes Jordan, among some others, would be outliers. What is your point?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top