UGH ... don't make us lock this thread again! Lol
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Derozan
Collapse
X
-
Just Is wrote: View PostQuick search via Basketball Reference:
6 Players qualify (looking at the last two seasons) for that criteria (and keep in mind, that even that would only be considered to be "pretty good"): Chris Paul, Stephen Curry (twice), Goran Dragic, J.J. Redick, and Marco Belinelli
Apparently, there are a TON of really awful players in the NBA.
not everyone has to be efficient to be good
now next if Derozan can put up 20-22p/4-6r/3-5a with shooting 42-45% that really goodAbbas wrote:
First of all i was my own source
Comment
-
Snooch wrote: View Post1) Because it breaks your attempt at misdirecting justified Demar criticism unfairly cast onto someone else.
2) Coaches and GMs would feel the same way. You needs to get rebounds. It matters not if your shooting guards gets you 10 per contest, or your pf gets you 10 per contest. As long as you get the rebounds. That is not a complicated thing to grasp.
Yeah westbrook gives you ridiculous numbers, but in comparison to Lowry, we arent that far off. Much Much closer than Demar and Harden for example.
Yes we are far off, WAYYYY far off
Westbrook almost averaged a triple double
and why are u evening mentioning harden? Harden and westbrook are MVP type players. DD and KL are notAbbas wrote:
First of all i was my own source
Comment
-
mcHAPPY wrote: View PostIf you're studying for math, i hope it is nothing beyond basic.
FG% is a simple stat. You need to look beyond that to get context.Abbas wrote:
First of all i was my own source
Comment
-
Abbas wrote: View Postoh thank you
not everyone has to be efficient to be good
now next if Derozan can put up 20-22p/4-6r/3-5a with shooting 42-45% that really goodAbbas wrote: View PostIm trying to argue that it is normal for lowry to shot poorly. forget derozan for a second. idgaf how many 3s take, 41%(last5yrs) from the field is awful. dont lie do urself thinking thats good
If Lowry shots like 47%fg and like 36% from deep thats considered pretty good
Granted, that'll be the last time I address that point as not to derail the thread even more.
Rather than giving an stat requirement for what I would consider a good season for Derozan, it would actually be a change in terms of gameplay. Less needlessly difficult shots, less OMFG** shots in general and a more team-orientated play style would be a pretty good start.
**OMFG = On-My-Own Field GoalLast edited by Just Is; Mon Oct 19, 2015, 05:09 PM."My biggest concern as a coach is to not confuse winning with progress." - Steve Kerr
"If it's unacceptable in defeat, it's unacceptable in victory." - Jeff Van Gundy
Comment
-
Abbas wrote: View Postoh thank you
not everyone has to be efficient to be good
now next if Derozan can put up 20-22p/4-6r/3-5a with shooting 42-45% that really good
Comment
-
Abbas wrote: View Postno need to get personal but in case ur wondering. im studying (fulltime) Actuarial(crazy hard math, search it up) and part time in business law
However since he took a lot of threes at a 40% clip...his TS% is 58% (!!!) for his career. Now that shows why he is one of the greatest shooters of all time.
Otherwise we would end up saying rediculous things like "DD only shoots 3% worse from the field than Ray Allen, therefor he should also be an all time elite shooter". The reality is much different.
Personally I prefer using eFG% over TS% because it favors the players who take great, open shots within the flow of the offense from the floor. It is rare that a great shot in the offense actually leads to a FT, so I dont feel it should be included in a players efficiency from the floor. Yes, free throws are valuable as long as they are being drawn in the paint. DD drew something like half (please fact check) of his shooting fouls on jump shots. That falsly inflates his TS% and was easily shut down in the playoffs (cut his FTA in half). TS% is good for evaluating a players efficiency at face value but I think has less context than eFG%. Just personal preference.
Basic box score stats are essentially useless and are from a by-gone era.
Comment
-
OldSkoolCool wrote: View PostRay Allens career raw fg% is only 45%. Not that great when youre talking about one of the greatest shooters of all time, right?
However since he took a lot of threes at a 40% clip...his TS% is 58% (!!!) for his career. Now that shows why he is one of the greatest shooters of all time.
Otherwise we would end up saying rediculous things like "DD only shoots 3% worse from the field than Ray Allen, therefor he should also be an all time elite shooter". The reality is much different.
Personally I prefer using eFG% over TS% because it favors the players who take great, open shots within the flow of the offense from the floor. It is rare that a great shot in the offense actually leads to a FT, so I dont feel it should be included in a players efficiency from the floor. Yes, free throws are valuable as long as they are being drawn in the paint. DD drew something like half (please fact check) of his shooting fouls on jump shots. That falsly inflates his TS% and was easily shut down in the playoffs (cut his FTA in half). TS% is good for evaluating a players efficiency at face value but I think has less context than eFG%. Just personal preference.
Basic box score stats are essentially useless and are from a by-gone era.
Comment
-
Abbas wrote: View PostYes we are far off, WAYYYY far off
Westbrook almost averaged a triple double
and why are u evening mentioning harden? Harden and westbrook are MVP type players. DD and KL are not
whya re your arguing semantics.
FACT: Lowry and Westbrook were withing 1% point difference in shooting percentages.
FACT: Demar and Harden(equally as comparable as Lowry and Westbrook) were a whole lot further off.
But please remain delusional that westbrook, an mp candidate can shoot 1% higher than Lowry and be great and fine, but Lowry is a bum.
Comment
-
Abbas wrote: View Postno need to get personal but in case ur wondering. im studying (fulltime) Actuarial(crazy hard math, search it up) and part time in business law
cause that is what it is called.
And running those variables through a premade software program is a real strain on the old noggin eh?
Comment
Comment