Do you think that John jenkins could contibute more than just a rebound & a steal tonight?

[Peoriabird]

You know what you're doing. At least I hope you know. 

Its amazing that some on this message board can cherry pick stats for the entire year to serve some sort of agenda against a player like what Teague had to go through last year but when there are questions about other sacred cows like Mack, the person asking the question has to be a troll...I guest the art of open dialogue has been lost on this message board

[Admin]

Its amazing that some on this message board can cherry pick stats for the entire year to serve some sort of agenda against a player like what Teague had to go through last year but when there are questions about other sacred cows like Mack, the person asking the question has to be a troll...I guest the art of open dialogue has been lost on this message board

 

That's not what I say you're trolling. YOU can post stats all you want to prove your point. You may even be right. But the way you've been going about it has been suspicious. Perhaps you truly have no idea how to track down the stats yourself, but I've never considered you to be incapable of doing your own research. 

[Admin]

I think he makes a good point.   There should be stat that tells us players are indispensable.   Otherwise how would we know who to play.  We'd have to hire someone who's fulltime job it was to figure out who the best players on a team are and play them.   But this person would basically have to do nothing but study basketball their whole life.   That's crazy.  The system where the average fan determines who's good and bad is obviously the way to go.

 

There is no single stat that everyone are going to agree upon. That's the issue. Basketball-reference does have a new feature that's basically like WARP (Wins Above Replacement Player) that they've added this season that might have some value, but again the minutes are too few to really glean any kind of accurate conclusion from them.

 

According to VORP (Value Over Replacement Player - clever little buggers aren't they) our two best players by far are:

• Millsap (3.2) and Korver (3.1)
• Horford (1.9) in the 2nd tier
• DMC (1.0) in the 3rd tier
• Teague (0.5), Thabo (0.5) and Schröder (0.3) come in just above the 0.0 mark, which means they are barely playing better than a league average player would do for us in terms of winning.  
• Next you've got Moose and Brand at exactly 0

After that you've got:

• Jenkins (-0.2)
• Pero (-0.3)
• Mack (-0.6)
• Bazemore (-0.8)

And finally you have Scott at a surprising -1.0. 

 

 

Rk	Player	G	MP	PER	TS%	TRB%	AST%	STL%	BLK%	TOV%	USG%	WS/48	VORP ▾
1	Paul Millsap	11	386	19.6	.543	14.1	15.1	3.1	2.1	13.5	24.8	.114	3.2
2	Kyle Korver	11	382	16.1	.723	7.0	13.6	0.8	1.7	13.4	14.3	.149	3.1
3	Al Horford	11	328	19.7	.563	12.6	14.8	1.3	3.2	8.8	20.8	.132	1.9
4	DeMarre Carroll	7	234	13.7	.595	11.4	7.2	1.5	0.0	9.2	14.9	.114	1.0
5	Jeff Teague	11	359	19.6	.578	3.6	35.4	2.2	1.3	17.9	25.1	.124	0.5
6	Thabo Sefolosha	11	251	11.8	.440	13.6	10.1	2.1	2.6	10.4	15.8	.057	0.5
7	Dennis Schröder	10	164	19.1	.596	6.5	27.3	3.1	0.0	18.9	22.3	.120	0.3
8	Mike Muscala	3	34	24.2	.644	10.4	0.0	0.0	11.8	7.0	19.2	.213	0.0
9	Elton Brand	2	21	13.5	.608	8.4	15.1	2.5	3.8	25.8	17.0	.021	0.0
10	John Jenkins	1	21	16.2	.575	2.8	0.0	2.5	0.0	8.7	25.1	.031	-0.2
11	Pero Antić	10	164	9.1	.472	11.9	6.4	0.6	1.5	9.0	15.7	.042	-0.3
12	Shelvin Mack	10	124	11.2	.449	5.7	29.0	2.1	0.0	17.9	16.6	.019	-0.6
13	Kent Bazemore	7	78	0.7	.313	7.6	9.0	2.0	1.0	19.4	15.2	-0.117	-0.8
14	Mike Scott	10	145	14.3	.560	8.6	5.0	0.7	0.0	8.3	26.6	.051	-1.0

Provided by Basketball-Reference.com: View Original Table

Generated 11/25/2014.

Edited November 25, 2014 by Dolfan23
Embedded table

[Peoriabird]

That's not what I say you're trolling. YOU can post stats all you want to prove your point. You may even be right. But the way you've been going about it has been suspicious. Perhaps you truly have no idea how to track down the stats yourself, but I've never considered you to be incapable of doing your own research. 

There are posters that will argue that many stats are invalid so if I post a bunch stat like I already have in the initial post...Some will argue about the stats instead of what they indicate.  I just want the board to agree upon a set of stats to look at so that we can speak the same language when evaluating player performances.

[Admin]

Here's a look at their VORP for last season. 

 

Rk	Player	G	MP	PER	TS%	TRB%	AST%	STL%	BLK%	TOV%	USG%	WS/48	VORP ▾
1	Paul Millsap	74	2482	19.8	.545	14.6	16.2	2.6	2.5	13.2	25.7	.129	3.1
2	Kyle Korver	71	2408	13.5	.653	6.8	13.3	1.5	0.8	13.6	14.2	.118	2.4
3	DeMarre Carroll	73	2341	13.9	.575	10.0	8.9	2.3	0.7	10.1	15.2	.119	2.3
4	Al Horford	29	958	22.0	.588	14.8	15.2	1.4	3.6	12.3	24.7	.141	1.0
5	Elton Brand	73	1414	14.0	.561	14.8	8.1	1.4	4.9	13.8	13.9	.121	0.8
6	Jeff Teague	79	2542	17.1	.541	4.7	35.1	1.8	0.5	16.1	25.7	.098	0.7
7	Pero Antić	50	925	11.7	.545	13.1	9.8	1.0	1.0	14.5	18.6	.075	0.2
8	Gustavo Ayón	26	429	12.9	.505	16.9	10.0	3.0	1.8	20.7	14.8	.078	0.2
9	Louis Williams	60	1445	14.2	.547	5.0	22.9	1.6	0.2	13.9	20.9	.087	0.1
10	Dexter Pittman	2	3	13.1	.000	57.9	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	28.5	-0.180	0.0
11	Shelvin Mack	73	1490	13.2	.510	6.2	28.8	1.7	0.1	14.3	19.0	.074	-0.1
12	Cartier Martin	53	822	10.9	.555	7.4	5.9	1.6	0.7	10.4	17.5	.064	-0.1
13	James Nunnally	4	54	6.2	.455	8.6	5.6	0.9	1.5	16.8	20.0	-0.055	-0.1
14	Jared Cunningham	5	22	-1.8	.347	2.6	18.8	0.0	0.0	41.0	10.1	-0.110	-0.1
15	Mike Muscala	20	215	10.8	.480	14.0	5.2	0.7	3.7	13.2	19.3	.040	-0.2
16	John Jenkins	13	158	4.7	.457	8.1	10.4	0.3	0.5	20.1	15.8	-0.043	-0.2
17	Mike Scott	80	1482	15.3	.559	11.1	8.9	1.0	0.4	10.3	23.5	.084	-0.3
18	Dennis Schröder	49	641	5.8	.442	5.4	22.0	1.3	0.0	22.8	19.0	-0.054	-0.9

Provided by Basketball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 11/25/2014.

[Peoriabird]

There is no single stat that everyone are going to agree upon. That's the issue. Basketball-reference does have a new feature that's basically like WARP (Wins Above Replacement Player) that they've added this season that might have some value, but again the minutes are too few to really glean any kind of accurate conclusion from them.

 

According to VORP (Value Over Replacement Player - clever little buggers aren't they) our two best players by far are:

• Millsap (3.2) and Korver (3.1)
• Horford (1.9) in the 2nd tier
• DMC (1.0) in the 3rd tier
• Teague (0.5), Thabo (0.5) and Schröder (0.3) come in just above the 0.0 mark, which means they are barely playing better than a league average player would do for us in terms of winning.  
• Next you've got Moose and Brand at exactly 0

After that you've got:

• Jenkins (-0.2)
• Pero (-0.3)
• Mack (-0.6)
• Bazemore (-0.8)

And finally you have Scott at a surprising -1.0. 

So again I ask, why in the heck are we using Mack and Pero so much if they are at the bottom of this player evaluation stat???

[Admin]

There are posters that will argue that many stats are invalid so if I post a bunch stat like I already have in the initial post...Some will argue about the stats instead of what they indicate.  I just want the board to agree upon a set of stats to look at so that we can speak the same language when evaluating player performances.

 

You're not going to get anyone to agree with a particular stat. Some believe in PER, some believe in WS or WS/48, some might like the new VORP, some may go with +/-, others may go with 82games simple rating or who knows what other crazy stat. 

[Admin]

So again I ask, why in the heck are we using Mack and Pero so much if they are at the bottom of this player evaluation stat???

 

Who knows if that stat actually means anything. We can look at it and say yeah this makes pretty good sense, but who knows for sure. 

 

But my answer to you would be that they do their jobs when they're out there and Bud can rely on them. They're not going to try and do things above their level, they're both going to give complete effort on both ends of the court and they both protect the ball well for their positions.  

[Peoriabird]

Who knows if that stat actually means anything. We can look at it and say yeah this makes pretty good sense, but who knows for sure. 

 

But my answer to you would be that they do their jobs when they're out there and Bud can rely on them. They're not going to try and do things above their level, they're both going to give complete effort on both ends of the court and they both protect the ball well for their positions.  

So did Elton Brand but he is not playing!

[Admin]

So did Elton Brand but he is not playing!

Brand is there as the break in case of emergency. His body is better off being saved until we actually need him later in the season and playoffs.

[rd79]

Is it that hard to understand? It doesn't matter how bad someones stats are, if the player you want to compare has no stats (too small sample size equals no stats).

So since you can't compare their stats, the coaches "only" use their basketball knowledge and their behind the scenes knowledge about the players they are working with every day...

[Peoriabird]

Is it that hard to understand? It doesn't matter how bad someones stats are, if the player you want to compare has no stats (too small sample size equals no stats).

So since you can't compare their stats, the coaches "only" use their basketball knowledge and their behind the scenes knowledge about the players they are working with every day...

Excuse my french but that sh-t didn't make any sense!  If stats say that player A is hurting the team's chances of winning and player's B's stats don't say the same even if there isn't an adequate sample size..What Moron would choose to stick with player A?  Bud didn't do it with Dennis last year so why is he doing it with Antić and Mack??

Edited November 25, 2014 by Peoriabird

[Admin]

Excuse my french but that sh-t didn't make any sense!  If stats say that player A is hurting the team's chances of winning and player's B's stats don't say the same even if there isn't an adequate sample size..What Moron would choose to stick with player A?  Bud didn't do it with Dennis last year so why is he doing it with Antić and Mack??

 

The stats DON'T show that Antić and Mack are hurting the team. They only show that they aren't making a difference in us winning. But those are just stats, they don't tell the whole story. 

 

The stats also DON'T show that Jenkins can do anything but hurt the team. 

 

According to the advanced stats of the past 1+ seasons, Scott has been our 2nd worst player. Should we bench him? 

[BrazilianHawk]

The stats DON'T show that Antić and Mack are hurting the team. They only show that they aren't making a difference in us winning. But those are just stats, they don't tell the whole story. 

 

The stats also DON'T show that Jenkins can do anything but hurt the team. 

 

According to the advanced stats of the past 1+ seasons, Scott has been our 2nd worst player. Should we bench him? 

 

Absolutely yes! We should. Outside some very streaky scoring, what does Mike to earn his consistent playing time. He rebounds some, but he's a PF, it's his job to rebound.

[Admin]

Absolutely yes! We should. Outside some very streaky scoring, what does Mike to earn his consistent playing time. He rebounds some, but he's a PF, it's his job to rebound.

 

You been talking to coach Bud? That's the only way I can figure you'd know what Scott's job is. 

[Admin]

Shelvin 13 points 5 dimes 2 steals tonight. 

Antić 5 points 2 blocks tonight.

Scott 17 points 7 boards 1 block tonight.

 

Jenkins cannot do any of those.

 

/thread

[Peoriabird]

Shelvin 13 points 5 dimes 2 steals tonight. 

Antić 5 points 2 blocks tonight.

Scott 17 points 7 boards 1 block tonight.

 

Jenkins cannot do any of those.

 

/thread

How do you know this?

[Admin]

How do you know this?

Common sense

[Peoriabird]

Common sense

common sense huh???

 

John Jenkins back to back game against Philly and San Antonio his rookie season

                                                                                                                                   

Wed 4/10

• @
•  
• PHI

W 124-101 33 8-13 .615 3-4 .750 2-2 1.000 0 6 0 1 0 1 21 Sat 4/6

• @
•  
• SA

L 97-99 28 7-9 .778 3-3 1.000 6-6 1.000 4 4 0 0 0 3 23

Edited November 26, 2014 by Peoriabird

[Peoriabird]

 

common sense huh???

                                                                                                                                   

Wed 4/10

• @
•  
• PHI

W 124-101 33 8-13 .615 3-4 .750 2-2 1.000 0 6 0 1 0 1 21 Sat 4/6

• @
•  
• SA

L 97-99 28 7-9 .778 3-3 1.000 6-6 1.000 4 4 0 0 0 3 23

 

Which one of Mack's stats could he not match again???