Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Valanciunas

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

  • Using per 36 makes very little sense across different seasons, would be better to use per 100 possessions like I did.

    Comment


    • Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
      JV's foul rate was a lot lower as a rookie than Poeltl's (6.7 per 100 poss compared to 9.1). But that also might be because he was a day one starter so you have more of a responsibility to avoid fouls and try to stay on the floor. Poeltl was only getting 11mpg, so for those minutes you play full throttle and if you foul, you foul because you're coming out anyway.

      I think Poeltl has way more potential on the defensive end of the floor. Really think we could use them like Adams and Kanter but nobody wants to do it.
      Poeltl definitely has more potential on the defensive end of the floor and I look forward to him developing into that over the next couple of seasons to the point where he is worthy of starting.

      Kanter had to come off the bench because he is one of the worst defensive big men in the league. Like, orders of magnitude worse than JV. Couldn't stay on the floor against top opposition.
      twitter.com/dhackett1565

      Comment


      • Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
        Using per 36 makes very little sense across different seasons, would be better to use per 100 possessions like I did.
        Why, exactly? The pace of play has been very consistent with the Raptors. The per 100 numbers show exactly the same story.

        Let's see, using per 100 numbers instead:

        Oh, did JV struggle with fouls his first year? Yeah, he had a very high 6.7 PF per 100 possessions. That's too much. He did improve rather dramatically in his second year, reducing his PF rate by 15% (OMG it's exactly the same), down to 5.7 PF/100. He's sat around that point ever since (edged slightly lower over time, but not much). If Poeltl was to reduce his foul rate by a similar 15% (no guarantee of that), he'd be all the way down at... 7.7 PF/100.

        The two are not comparable. JV was never, ever, a foul machine like Poeltl was last year.

        Wow, I'm really glad I used per 100 stats instead. Completely changes the picture there.
        twitter.com/dhackett1565

        Comment


        • DanH wrote: View Post
          Why, exactly? The pace of play has been very consistent with the Raptors. The per 100 numbers show exactly the same story.

          Let's see, using per 100 numbers instead:

          Oh, did JV struggle with fouls his first year? Yeah, he had a very high 6.7 PF per 100 possessions. That's too much. He did improve rather dramatically in his second year, reducing his PF rate by 15% (OMG it's exactly the same), down to 5.7 PF/100. He's sat around that point ever since (edged slightly lower over time, but not much). If Poeltl was to reduce his foul rate by a similar 15% (no guarantee of that), he'd be all the way down at... 7.7 PF/100.

          The two are not comparable. JV was never, ever, a foul machine like Poeltl was last year.

          Wow, I'm really glad I used per 100 stats instead. Completely changes the picture there.
          Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
          JV's foul rate was a lot lower as a rookie than Poeltl's (6.7 per 100 poss compared to 9.1). But that also might be because he was a day one starter so you have more of a responsibility to avoid fouls and try to stay on the floor. Poeltl was only getting 11mpg, so for those minutes you play full throttle and if you foul, you foul because you're coming out anyway.

          I think Poeltl has way more potential on the defensive end of the floor. Really think we could use them like Adams and Kanter but nobody wants to do it.
          My point was I already posted the per 100 possession numbers.

          Comment


          • Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
            My point was I already posted the per 100 possession numbers.
            Yeah, it was a simultaneous post, your post wasn't up when I started typing mine, and you didn't present all the information I did. So why again would per 100 be better than per 36?
            twitter.com/dhackett1565

            Comment


            • DanH wrote: View Post
              Yeah, it was a simultaneous post, your post wasn't up when I started typing mine, and you didn't present all the information I did. So why again would per 100 be better than per 36?
              Because teams don't play at the same pace from season to season or team to team? Should be fairly obvious. It's more accurate.

              Same reason why we use oRTG and dRTG instead of points per game scored for and against. Per 100 possessions instead of per 48 minutes.

              Comment


              • Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
                Because teams don't play at the same pace from season to season or team to team? Should be fairly obvious. It's more accurate.

                Same reason why we use oRTG and dRTG instead of points per game scored for and against. Per 100 possessions instead of per 48 minutes.
                We use ORTG and DRTG because teams across the league vary pretty widely in terms of pace. The Raptors have been a pretty consistent team in terms of pace, and the numbers came out exactly the same as I showed using per 100 versus per 36. I mean, if you wanted to say "don't use per 36, use per 100, because look at how different the story is when you do," your suggestion would be well taken. Instead you ignore the actual point being made and nitpick the stat used for no reason at all.
                twitter.com/dhackett1565

                Comment


                • DanH wrote: View Post
                  Whether you agree with me or not has very little bearing on my stance. Same goes for Stackhouse fluffing one of his players on TV. Siakam has all the tools, and I can see what Stackhouse sees in him. Heck, a few years down the road I expect him to be a very solid, versatile defender; maybe as soon as next year if we give him some consistent run out there rather than jerking him around in and out of the starting unit and lineup, period. But last year, with all his gifts, he had no idea where he should be on the floor. His help was erratic, often either late or way too early or in entirely the wrong place. With time that will improve. I just don't like giving young learning players their reps against starting quality opposition - we saw what happens when you do that just last season, with Pascal himself.

                  Oh, did JV struggle with fouls his first year? Yeah, he had a very high 4.6 PF per 36 minutes. That's too much. He did improve rather dramatically in his second year, reducing his PF rate by 15%, down to 3.9 PF/36. He's sat around that point ever since (edged slightly lower over time, but not much). If Poeltl was to reduce his foul rate by a similar 15% (no guarantee of that), he'd be all the way down at... 5.5 PF/36.

                  The two are not comparable. JV was never, ever, a foul machine like Poeltl was last year.
                  Ex NBA player/On the coaching staff > Guy on his computer using stats. Weather you agree with me has little bearing on my stance either.

                  Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk
                  @Chr1st1anL

                  Comment


                  • Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
                    Ex NBA player/On the coaching staff > Guy on his computer using stats. Weather you agree with me has little bearing on my stance either.

                    Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk
                    And I'm fine with that.
                    twitter.com/dhackett1565

                    Comment


                    • DanH wrote: View Post
                      We use ORTG and DRTG because teams across the league vary pretty widely in terms of pace. The Raptors have been a pretty consistent team in terms of pace, and the numbers came out exactly the same as I showed using per 100 versus per 36. I mean, if you wanted to say "don't use per 36, use per 100, because look at how different the story is when you do," your suggestion would be well taken. Instead you ignore the actual point being made and nitpick the stat used for no reason at all.
                      given that we have played at roughly the same pace for the last few years I would say that fouls/36 is a quicker way to judge whether or not a guy can reliably stay on the floor at starter-level minutes.

                      The one caveat is that you can't say for sure whether a guy would foul as often if he knew he was required to play starter minutes. But, by my recollection, Jakob commits a lot of blocking fouls / fouls on layup attempts, so it's not like they can just tell him not to reach in. We'll see how it plays out.

                      Comment


                      • DanH wrote: View Post
                        We use ORTG and DRTG because teams across the league vary pretty widely in terms of pace. The Raptors have been a pretty consistent team in terms of pace, and the numbers came out exactly the same as I showed using per 100 versus per 36. I mean, if you wanted to say "don't use per 36, use per 100, because look at how different the story is when you do," your suggestion would be well taken. Instead you ignore the actual point being made and nitpick the stat used for no reason at all.
                        I agreed with the point, JV did have a much lower foul rate. I was just pointing out that per 100 poss was a better measure. And while the Raps did have the same rank in pace (24th) in both guy's rookie years, our pace was higher with about 4 more possessions per game this past year than 2012-13.

                        Period and point blank it's more accurate to use per 100 possessions.

                        Comment


                        • Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
                          I agreed with the point, JV did have a much lower foul rate. I was just pointing out that per 100 poss was a better measure. And while the Raps did have the same rank in pace (24th) in both guy's rookie years, our pace was higher with about 4 more possessions per game this past year than 2012-13.

                          Period and point blank it's more accurate to use per 100 possessions.
                          And I don't disagree with that on principle. I just found it odd that you'd level the criticism in a case where it made literally zero difference. When possible and not misleading, I use per-36 stats, as they are more intuitive for people to understand on the scale of a player's typical minutes played. No player ever hits 100 possessions in a game. We use that consistently for team based stats because most teams float around 100 possessions or so per game in terms of pace.
                          twitter.com/dhackett1565

                          Comment


                          • DanH wrote: View Post
                            And I don't disagree with that on principle. I just found it odd that you'd level the criticism in a case where it made literally zero difference. When possible and not misleading, I use per-36 stats, as they are more intuitive for people to understand on the scale of a player's typical minutes played. No player ever hits 100 possessions in a game. We use that consistently for team based stats because most teams float around 100 possessions or so per game in terms of pace.
                            Dude I just made a comment I didn't attack your character or anything. Just pointing out per 100 possessions is better. I didn't even quote you, it's useful information for others as well.


                            Btw I have a question. Hypothetically if we had 2Pat still would you be ok with starting 2Pat/Ibaka and moving JV to the bench then?

                            Comment


                            • Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View Post
                              Dude I just made a comment I didn't attack your character or anything. Just pointing out per 100 possessions is better. I didn't even quote you, it's useful information for others as well.


                              Btw I have a question. Hypothetically if we had 2Pat still would you be ok with starting 2Pat/Ibaka and moving JV to the bench then?
                              I still wouldn't like the idea of Ibaka taking on starting C's on a night in, night out basis. But I'd be far more open to the idea - heck, my proposed (if undesired) plan for the Raptors to shed salary was to move JV for picks, keep Pat and Carroll, start KL-DD-DC-PP-SI. I at least understand the logic in that - a four-out offence to make up for a small defence and lacklustre rebouding lineup, with lots of switchability and smart players to make up for the rebounding/lack of inside scoring.

                              Although I think I'd come out against it in the end (I am really concerned about Ibaka holding up for a full season at C), at least it would be a well thought out idea with lots of evidence of it working (at least in a short term), with far fewer drawbacks than the alternatives being discussed now.
                              twitter.com/dhackett1565

                              Comment


                              • DanH wrote: View Post

                                Kanter had to come off the bench because he is one of the worst defensive big men in the league. Like, orders of magnitude worse than JV. Couldn't stay on the floor against top opposition.
                                Agreed. This echos my reaction when this shit came up dozens of pages ago. Give JV at least a little respect man. These Kanter comparisons are uncalled for.
                                Two beer away from being two beers away.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X