Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack Plays, Raps Win

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    There are good stats, and then there are bad stats. These are bad stats. They tell us virtually nothing about how useful Jack is, because last year Jack playing a lot of minutes was correlated with a very easy stretch of our schedule.

    For the record, I continue to believe that Jack is a good backup.

    Comment


    • #32
      malefax wrote: View Post
      There are good stats, and then there are bad stats. These are bad stats. They tell us virtually nothing about how useful Jack is, because last year Jack playing a lot of minutes was correlated with a very easy stretch of our schedule.

      For the record, I continue to believe that Jack is a good backup.
      when you're a team that lost to the golden state warriors TWICE.. one of those losses coming after losing to the sacramento kings. i dont think you can say you had an easy stretch of the schedule ever.

      Comment


      • #33
        Jordan-Drexler wrote: View Post
        I remember one home game late last year where jack came in sick (flu or something) and still carried the team on his back in the last quarter and came up huge for the victory. Thats the kind of intangible look at more than anything else.
        I recall that. Wasn't there some rumor going around after that game that Triano was trying to find out if it was something that he ate like some of Turk's left over pizza and then hope to convince Jack that he should eat some more of it before every Raptors game
        Avatar: Riverboat Coffee House 134 Yorkville Ave. billboard of upcoming entertainers - Circa 1960s

        Memories some so sweet, indeed

        Larger Photo of the avatar



        Quote from well known personality who led their high school team to a state championship.

        Comment


        • #34
          malefax wrote: View Post
          There are good stats, and then there are bad stats. These are bad stats. They tell us virtually nothing about how useful Jack is, because last year Jack playing a lot of minutes was correlated with a very easy stretch of our schedule.

          For the record, I continue to believe that Jack is a good backup.
          Geez. I don't know how you can say that.

          The numbers as I broke them down clearly shows that the Raptors although still terrible against +.500 teams were better when Jack started then when Calderon started.
          Avatar: Riverboat Coffee House 134 Yorkville Ave. billboard of upcoming entertainers - Circa 1960s

          Memories some so sweet, indeed

          Larger Photo of the avatar



          Quote from well known personality who led their high school team to a state championship.

          Comment


          • #35
            malefax wrote: View Post
            There are good stats, and then there are bad stats. These are bad stats. They tell us virtually nothing about how useful Jack is, because last year Jack playing a lot of minutes was correlated with a very easy stretch of our schedule.

            For the record, I continue to believe that Jack is a good backup.

            This shouldnt be a debate, wether these stats are good or bad,there are numerous stats showing that calderon (though talented) dosnt work with this team as much as jack. It shouldnt be debated, calderon would play better on a different team if they were structured right.

            Comment


            • #36
              Red and White wrote: View Post
              This shouldnt be a debate, wether these stats are good or bad,there are numerous stats showing that calderon (though talented) dosnt work with this team as much as jack. It shouldnt be debated, calderon would play better on a different team if they were structured right.
              My only problem with that is these stats you are referencing say Jack works better with the team we had last year. The same year Calderon had his worst year.

              What about this year? Maybe it's not so cut and dry

              Comment


              • #37
                I hate these kind of stats
                the bottom line is alway the the win for any team and if jack would have won us more games they would have played him 48 minutes and benched jose a long time ago.

                Comment


                • #38
                  RecklessIndifference wrote: View Post
                  My only problem with that is these stats you are referencing say Jack works better with the team we had last year. The same year Calderon had his worst year.

                  What about this year? Maybe it's not so cut and dry
                  I think since Calderon is more of a pure PG his play was more adversely affected by playing with the Pizza Man. If Calderon is around come November I expect that he will play better in 10-11 than he did in 09-10
                  Avatar: Riverboat Coffee House 134 Yorkville Ave. billboard of upcoming entertainers - Circa 1960s

                  Memories some so sweet, indeed

                  Larger Photo of the avatar



                  Quote from well known personality who led their high school team to a state championship.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    jrdyck wrote: View Post
                    When Jarrett Jack played 28+ minutes in games last season . . . 25 wins, 15 losses (0.625)
                    (21 out of 40 games were vs. +.500 teams)

                    When Jack played less than 28 minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 wins, 27 losses (0.357)
                    (26 out of 42 games were vs. +.500 teams)

                    Other interesting parallels between JJ and winning:
                    6+ assists . . . 22-13
                    <6 assists . . . 18-29
                    3+ rebounds . . . 28-14
                    <3 rebounds . . . 12-28

                    No such correlations for Jose Calderon.

                    Does it get any clearer than this?
                    Sorry, but this is horrible analysis.

                    Your comparison between Jack playing >28 minutes and Jack playing <28 minutes is based on the assumption that Jack can do no wrong. You basically state that the team benefits from more Jack and the team suffers from not as much Jack. What you're missing is the possibility that the fewer minutes are due to his performance (or lack thereof).

                    First, let's break up the records into something a bit more accurate and detailed (and BTW, I do not claim to be a stat-head like Liston, but the observations that follow should be mostly correct):

                    A) When Jack starts, plays more than 28 minutes, and Calderon doesn't play at all (when he was injured):
                    Team: 8-4 record (12 game sample size)
                    Jack: +19
                    Calderon: n/a

                    B) When Jack starts, plays more than 28 minutes, and Calderon plays off the bench:
                    Team: 11-8 record (19 game sample size)
                    Jack: -12
                    Calderon: +34

                    C) When Jack starts, plays LESS than 28 minutes, and Calderon doesn't play at all (when he was injured):
                    Team: 1-1 record (2 game sample size)
                    Jack: +1
                    Calderon: n/a

                    D) When Jack starts, plays LESS than 28 minutes, and Calderon plays off the bench:
                    Team: 3-7 record (10 game sample size)
                    Jack: -87
                    Calderon: +53

                    Now, I don't usually trust +/- stats, but it does help tell a story when we make the proper comparisons between two floor generals. Overall (A+B+C+D), when Jack started, the team had a decent 23-20 record (more on that later), but Jack's lineups were a combined -79. Calderon's lineups were a combined +87, and while it's probably true that he spent less time against the other team's top players during that time, we also can't overlook his contribution to that 23-20 record.

                    We can also see from A+B that the team was a very nice 19-12 when Jack started and went the distance, but Jack's lineups barely outscored the opponent when he played 28+ minutes (+7 over 31 games), while Calderon's were a +34 over 19 games. Not to take away from Jack keeping up with the opposition, but again we can't overlook Calderon's contribution off the bench.

                    What you leave out is C+D, where the team went 4-8 when Jack started but played fewer than 28 minutes, and this is also where +/- helps most. It would be easy to simply blame Calderon and say that had Triano given Jack more minutes, the team would have been better than 4-8 over those 12 games, but the fact is Jack's diminished minutes were largely his lineup's fault, and as the floor general, his fault. Jack's lineups were a combined -86 over 12 games (an average of over a 7 point deficit per game), while Calderon's lineups stepped up with +53 over 10 games.

                    ----------

                    Even the above fails to tell the entire story, so now we'll look at quality of opponent. The team was 17-22 with Calderon starting, which pales in comparison to Jack's 23-20, but how do the opponents stack up? For the purpose of below, an "elite" team is any team above .600.

                    Jack ---
                    Wins: 23 total, 4 vs elite, 19 vs non-elite
                    Losses: 20 total, 10 vs elite, 10 vs non-elite
                    Total: 14 vs elite, 29 vs non-elite (.326)

                    Calderon ---
                    Wins: 17 total, 2 vs elite, 15 vs non-elite
                    Losses: 22 total, 16 vs elite, 6 vs non-elite
                    Total: 18 vs elite, 21 vs non-elite (.462)

                    There are 12 elite teams, so any non-elite team should have, on average, .414 or 41.4% of their games vs elite teams. It's clear, then, that Calderon's schedule was above average in difficulty compared to the rest of the league, while Jack's was below average. I think the schedule was also more difficult in terms of days off for Calderon as well, but I'm not curious enough to find out (but someone else is free to ^_^). Jack was more disadvantaged by Bosh's absence (by 1 game plus the 2 minutes Bosh played vs Cleveland before breaking his face), but at the same time, most of Calderon's starts came at the beginning of the season, when the team was clearly having problems meshing all the new faces together.

                    I'm not saying Calderon > Jack, because I think they both have different strengths and weaknesses, but all of the above should at least show that things are never as clear as you may think. If someone wants to do a comparison similar to the first section for Calderon's starts and >28 and <28 minutes, I'd be curious to see what we may learn from it, but for now, it's my opinion that the team would be best off with BOTH point guards staying.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Red and White wrote: View Post
                      This shouldnt be a debate, wether these stats are good or bad,there are numerous stats showing that calderon (though talented) dosnt work with this team as much as jack. It shouldnt be debated, calderon would play better on a different team if they were structured right.
                      Ultimately, the only stat that matters are points for and points against. If you score more points for than against, you win.

                      Last year, with the core guys being DeRozan-Turkoglu-Bosh-Bargnani plus a point guard, Jack et al surprisingly only put up 1.02 ppp (points per possession) for, while giving up 1.15 ppp (http://www.82games.com/0910/09TOR3.HTM#5man), for a -99 overall. Calderon et al put up 1.14 ppp for and gave up 1.14 ppp as well (http://www.82games.com/0910/09TOR1.HTM#5man), for a -8 overall over a similar number of minutes. Does this mean Calderon or Jack was better with the starting unit last year?

                      This year, assuming the core guys are DeRozan-Weems-Johnson-Bargnani plus a point guard (it's not like we have data for a lineup with Kleiza, etc), Jack *seems* like a better fit because last year that lineup posted 1.17 ppp for and 0.90 ppp against, for an overall +16. Calderon with the same guys (and over similar minutes) posted 1.18 ppp for and 1.09 ppp against, for an overall +1 (indicating the other team somehow had more possessions over those minutes). Mind you, the sample size for this lineup is like 10% the size of the main lineup, so I'm curious where you find your "numerous stats showing that calderon (though talented) dosnt work with this team as much as jack"?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X