- 6,774
- 3,078
Cp3 is a defensive liability
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But I'm willing to bet there is a flaw with the math.
Of course there are, there are flaws in all of them.
Look at who is 4th in steal percentages.
I guess you can argue Stephen Curry is a great defender using that statistics.
No, because steals aren't a great way to measure defense by themselves; I was just showing how big of a lead he has in addition to his defensive rating and defensive win shares and the Hornets' defensive rating as a team. Look at them collectively, not individually.
But I'm willing to bet there is a flaw with the math.
Of course there are, there are flaws in all of them.
Look at who is 4th in steal percentages.
I guess you can argue Stephen Curry is a great defender using that statistics.
No, because steals aren't a great way to measure defense by themselves; I was just showing how big of a lead he has in addition to his defensive rating and defensive win shares and the Hornets' defensive rating as a team. Look at them collectively, not individually.
Originally Posted by amel223
Look at who is 4th in steal percentages.
I guess you can argue Stephen Curry is a great defender using that statistics.
I don't know how defensive rating is calculated or how defensive win shares is calculated. But I'm willing to bet there is a flaw with the math.
I'm not liking the trend with these advanced statistics.
Like I've said in an earlier post Hollinger wrote an article using this %%!! to argue that D'antoni's Suns played better defense than the 2004 Pistons.
Originally Posted by amel223
Look at who is 4th in steal percentages.
I guess you can argue Stephen Curry is a great defender using that statistics.
I don't know how defensive rating is calculated or how defensive win shares is calculated. But I'm willing to bet there is a flaw with the math.
I'm not liking the trend with these advanced statistics.
Like I've said in an earlier post Hollinger wrote an article using this %%!! to argue that D'antoni's Suns played better defense than the 2004 Pistons.
I hope you know that not every scout and talent evaluator use advanced statistics.Originally Posted by abovelegit1
Originally Posted by amel223
Look at who is 4th in steal percentages.
I guess you can argue Stephen Curry is a great defender using that statistics.
I don't know how defensive rating is calculated or how defensive win shares is calculated. But I'm willing to bet there is a flaw with the math.
I'm not liking the trend with these advanced statistics.
Like I've said in an earlier post Hollinger wrote an article using this %%!! to argue that D'antoni's Suns played better defense than the 2004 Pistons.
Seems to me that you're finding flaws in every advanced stat simply because it doesn't agree with your opinion.
Go ahead and use those surface statistics like points, assists, and rebounds, but you're simply doing yourself a disservice.
All these advanced metrics simply attempt to fill the holes present in the basic stats by accounting for minutes, turnovers, possessions used, game pace, etc. If a player is averaging 20 points per on 45% shooting in 36 minutes, and there is another player averaging 15 per on 50% in 25 minutes, who is the better scorer? It's not that hard to find the flaws.
So whats the logic of using the stats that tell you strictly one piece of data, when you can use a metric like PER or win shares which are all-encompassing? Metrics that, I may add, all grade Paul not only as the top point guard, but as one of the top players overall.
One may say they dislike stats in favor of "watching the games" as if they are mutually exclusive. Well I'd say what exactly do you see Paul doing on the floor that is so bad? Dudes make it seem like he's Tyrone Lue out there for some reason. He runs the pick and roll as good as anyone, he barely wastes any possessions, he takes GOOD shots, always finds the open man, etc.
As for your arbitrary arguments claiming Paul is a horrible defender ill say this:
You're not an NBA scout, nor are you any sort of talent evaluator. So ill take the advanced metrics over your pretend scouting any day.
I hope you know that not every scout and talent evaluator use advanced statistics.Originally Posted by abovelegit1
Originally Posted by amel223
Look at who is 4th in steal percentages.
I guess you can argue Stephen Curry is a great defender using that statistics.
I don't know how defensive rating is calculated or how defensive win shares is calculated. But I'm willing to bet there is a flaw with the math.
I'm not liking the trend with these advanced statistics.
Like I've said in an earlier post Hollinger wrote an article using this %%!! to argue that D'antoni's Suns played better defense than the 2004 Pistons.
Seems to me that you're finding flaws in every advanced stat simply because it doesn't agree with your opinion.
Go ahead and use those surface statistics like points, assists, and rebounds, but you're simply doing yourself a disservice.
All these advanced metrics simply attempt to fill the holes present in the basic stats by accounting for minutes, turnovers, possessions used, game pace, etc. If a player is averaging 20 points per on 45% shooting in 36 minutes, and there is another player averaging 15 per on 50% in 25 minutes, who is the better scorer? It's not that hard to find the flaws.
So whats the logic of using the stats that tell you strictly one piece of data, when you can use a metric like PER or win shares which are all-encompassing? Metrics that, I may add, all grade Paul not only as the top point guard, but as one of the top players overall.
One may say they dislike stats in favor of "watching the games" as if they are mutually exclusive. Well I'd say what exactly do you see Paul doing on the floor that is so bad? Dudes make it seem like he's Tyrone Lue out there for some reason. He runs the pick and roll as good as anyone, he barely wastes any possessions, he takes GOOD shots, always finds the open man, etc.
As for your arbitrary arguments claiming Paul is a horrible defender ill say this:
You're not an NBA scout, nor are you any sort of talent evaluator. So ill take the advanced metrics over your pretend scouting any day.
Originally Posted by atransta
Cp3 is a defensive liability
Originally Posted by atransta
Cp3 is a defensive liability
amel223 wrote:
Like I've said in an earlier post Hollinger wrote an article using this %%!! to argue that D'antoni's Suns played better defense than the 2004 Pistons.
Say again?Mind posting that up for me please?
amel223 wrote:
Like I've said in an earlier post Hollinger wrote an article using this %%!! to argue that D'antoni's Suns played better defense than the 2004 Pistons.
Say again?Mind posting that up for me please?
You sure as hell have been clinging to your conclusions though, using advanced stats because that's really all you have, but then when it doesn't align with your opinion now the sample size is too small and the difference is too minute but you were the one talking about "far and away." Only thing far and away is CP3 standing at the top of the key watching Westbrook dunk on Okafor.
According to , our best lineup is Royal Ivey, Morris Peterson, Kevin Durant, DJ White, BJ Mullens and we'd win by 85.
You're really not trying to understand or look at things from another angle, so just forget it. I already said that using numbers for a guy who has played 22 minutes in the entire season is pointless, so I don't know why you ignored that.
You sure as hell have been clinging to your conclusions though, using advanced stats because that's really all you have, but then when it doesn't align with your opinion now the sample size is too small and the difference is too minute but you were the one talking about "far and away." Only thing far and away is CP3 standing at the top of the key watching Westbrook dunk on Okafor.
According to , our best lineup is Royal Ivey, Morris Peterson, Kevin Durant, DJ White, BJ Mullens and we'd win by 85.
You're really not trying to understand or look at things from another angle, so just forget it. I already said that using numbers for a guy who has played 22 minutes in the entire season is pointless, so I don't know why you ignored that.
You're really not trying to understand or look at things from another angle, so just forget it. I already said that using numbers for a guy who has played 22 minutes in the entire season is pointless, so I don't know why you ignored that.Originally Posted by JD617
You sure as hell have been clinging to your conclusions though, using advanced stats because that's really all you have, but then when it doesn't align with your opinion now the sample size is too small and the difference is too minute but you were the one talking about "far and away."
According to , our best lineup is Royal Ivey, Morris Peterson, Kevin Durant, DJ White, BJ Mullens and we'd win by 85.
You're really not trying to understand or look at things from another angle, so just forget it. I already said that using numbers for a guy who has played 22 minutes in the entire season is pointless, so I don't know why you ignored that.Originally Posted by JD617
You sure as hell have been clinging to your conclusions though, using advanced stats because that's really all you have, but then when it doesn't align with your opinion now the sample size is too small and the difference is too minute but you were the one talking about "far and away."
According to , our best lineup is Royal Ivey, Morris Peterson, Kevin Durant, DJ White, BJ Mullens and we'd win by 85.