GAME 79: HAWKS AT RAPTORS; Tues. April 5th 7:30 on TSN

[G__Deane]

Big gamble to bet so much on two players at any time. But to have them both miss so much of the year and still be ~.500 and in the post season is pretty remarkable. I personally don't think they will be but if they somehow get Kawhi and NP back healthy, they could go a long way. But screw Kawhi and Ballmer.....

Ty Lue should get COY consideration. Not win it, but get consideration. Nick Nurse should in the East too

[KeonClark]

Actually a big gamble for the Clippers.
There was no guarantee they'd get into the playoffs with Kawhi sitting.
PG was also out for a long period of time.
The just happened to be really gritty and well coached.

Funny how the narrative completely flipped on Ty Lue. Not some coat tail riding dummy any longer.

[DanH]

I get what you're saying, but for example: if Steph Curry is a career 40% shooter from 3 and he starts the season 0 for 100... are we all not expecting him to go 80 for his next 100? And is that not pretty much what actually happens.

No, we are not. We understand regressing to the mean so we are expecting him to go 40 for his next 100. And no, that (80/100) is not what happens, generally.

[RaptorsVictim]

Cade didn't play last game either. Scottie had 19 and 14 this game. I'll be kind of annoyed if he doesn't win.

I know in the grand scheme of Scottie's career, it probably won't mean much, but its nice to see our players get accolades.

I believe that he deserves the trophy even if Mobely and Cade are playing, the guy is not playing as a rookie the guy is just unbelievable.
People do not notice that Scottie is not even the third option in our offense, but in spite of that he is averaging around 15.5 points, almost 8 rebounds a game and about 3.5 assist. Those numbers for him while not being an option in the offense are just out of the chart. Mobely is a major option in the Cavs.

Scottie is the rookie of the year in a fair way.

[big boi]

I get what you're saying, but for example: if Steph Curry is a career 40% shooter from 3 and he starts the season 0 for 100... are we all not expecting him to go 80 for his next 100? And is that not pretty much what actually happens.

I realize you're exaggerating to make a point with the 0 for 100, but no, we wouldn't expect him to go 80 for his next 100. We'd expect him to go 40 for his next 100.

Regarding Fred, if he's taking good shots, I'm fine with him keeping on shooting for the most part. He's an excellent shooter. If someone else is hot, pass the ball to the hot hand, but Fred has earned the green light. I just don't want to see him prioritize his offence over exploring looks for other very good offensive players like Pascal (who right now looks un-guardable) but also GTJ, Scottie and OG. When this team moves the ball and gives up a good shot for a great shot, they're hard to beat, and they're also fun to watch.

[golden]

No, we are not. We understand regressing to the mean so we are expecting him to go 40 for his next 100. And no, that (80/100) is not what happens, generally.

So you're basically saying that there are no such thing as hot and cold streaks?

In your scenario, Curry starts out the season really cold, but we should still expect him to shoot his career average for the rest of the season, finishing the season below his normal career average? He never gets on a few hot streaks to nullify the cold streak? That's not how real basketball plays out, especially 3-pt shooting variance.

[golden]

I realize you're exaggerating to make a point with the 0 for 100, but no, we wouldn't expect him to go 80 for his next 100. We'd expect him to go 40 for his next 100.

Regarding Fred, if he's taking good shots, I'm fine with him keeping on shooting for the most part. He's an excellent shooter. If someone else is hot, pass the ball to the hot hand, but Fred has earned the green light. I just don't want to see him prioritize his offence over exploring looks for other very good offensive players like Pascal (who right now looks un-guardable) but also GTJ, Scottie and OG. When this team moves the ball and gives up a good shot for a great shot, they're hard to beat, and they're also fun to watch.

Can't argue with any of the bold, but simply add that Fred needs to add a whole lot more to his game to put his teammates in positions for easier baskets, like a Trae Young, Darius Garland and of course, Kyle Lowry.

It wasn't just his shots last night... it's a make or miss league. It's his true PG skills. For example, that play where he dribbled into the corner and hot-potatoed the ball to Birch who ended up having to create off the dribble from the corner. A PG has to have better court awareness than that.

And Fred frequently looks trapped and without a plan, even when he achieves the goal of getting deep penetration into the lane, like Trae. It's probably because he hasn't developed his floater/lob game, which is a must have for small PGs. Fred's main weapons are drive & kick to shooters, which becomes predictable, or pick & rolls, DHOs with Pascal above the break. That doesn't help to elevate other players, especially energy bigs.

[Kagemusha]

Funny how the narrative completely flipped on Ty Lue. Not some coat tail riding dummy any longer.

There's a reason he's getting tapped to coach the star studded teams.

[DanH]

So you're basically saying that there are no such thing as hot and cold streaks?

In your scenario, Curry starts out the season really cold, but we should still expect him to shoot his career average for the rest of the season, finishing the season below his normal career average? He never gets on a few hot streaks to nullify the cold streak? That's not how real basketball plays out, especially 3-pt shooting variance.

Of course there are hot and cold streaks. But a hot streak does not make a cold streak more likely to immediately follow. When those hot and cold streaks happen are completely random. This is how regression to the mean works - over a large sample, you will regress to the mean following a series of randomly occurring hot and cold streaks. But it does not work in the micro - a cold shooter is not expected to get hot, they are just as likely to stay cold, and more likely to simply perform to their average, in the short term.

[Primer]

Of course there are hot and cold streaks. But a hot streak does not make a cold streak more likely to immediately follow. When those hot and cold streaks happen are completely random. This is how regression to the mean works - over a large sample, you will regress to the mean following a series of randomly occurring hot and cold streaks. But it does not work in the micro - a cold shooter is not expected to get hot, they are just as likely to stay cold, and more likely to simply perform to their average, in the short term.

Statistics is incredibly hard for the layman to understand.

My favorite example is there are 3 doors and a prize is behind 1 door. You get to pick a door and they will open one of the other two without the prize behind it. You are then given to choice to stay with the door you picked or switch to the other closed door. Statistics says you should always switch to the other closed door. Really hard to wrap your mind around without seeing the math. It's called the Monty hall problem.

Another fun example was in my class of about 45 the teacher bet the class $100 two people in the class had the same birthday. Seems like a great bet to take, but turns out there is a 93.4% chance two people in the class had the same birthday. Birthday paradox, look it up.