What's new
By:

2023 NBA Draft Megathread

Locke is very transparent with what he's doing, I don't see the issue. I thought it was good insight actually. This model won't blow you away with the players it 'hit' on. But the players it red flagged makes it seem extremely solid, and if someone is grading out horribly in his metrics, it is definitely something to consider.
 
KqWIN said:
I don't know what Locke does now, he is not worth a listen for me. But when I did listen, the transition -> athleticism stuff was obviously really bad. Maybe he's gotten better, I wouldn't know. Transition -> Athleticism isn't that bad of a logical line to draw....but he only uses transition efficiency, which is not useful. The best transition players aren't the players who are the most efficient, they are the one's who create the most transition opportunities. It's kinda like saying a 40% 3 point shooter who takes one per game is better than a 35% shooter who shoots 10 per game. You shouldn't really be relying on one number so significantly in the first place, but he's using one that's fairly useless for what he's trying to do anyways.
Click to expand...
He uses more than transition numbers for his athleticism markers bud. Why are you going to talk **** on something you dont know about?
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
He uses more than transition numbers for his athleticism markers bud. Why are you going to talk **** on something you dont know about?
Click to expand...

Well that's why I asked, is he still doing the transition -> athleticism thing? Someone said yes, so why not comment on it? This example is easy to remember because it is generally how he does things. Like I said, if he's gotten better, good for him....maybe he's worth a listen again. But the awful statistical analysis is what made me not listen to begin with.

Why do you make up things out of thin air for the sake of argument? You will never answer that one unfortunately. You won't answer why Bailey and Black are so different either, you will just say something like "it's obvious".
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Brother I can show you combine results for dudes who have posted 38 inch verticals and then dude who have 32 inches and everyone would pick the guy with 32 as more athletic. Vertical is not a good marker for functional athletic ability in the NBA.
Click to expand...
Cool. I was simply explaining to you why some people dont like Locke. He makes up stats that mean nothing to anyone and that can get annoying to some people.
Just speaking for myself, i dont care. I have no dog in the fight. I neve listen to locke or read anything he writes (if he even writes stuff) or follow him on anything. What locke says and does has no effect on me personally and I dont really know much about him or his content. I have simply read what others seem to not like about him and Im passing that information on to you in case you missed it.
 
KqWIN said:
Well that's why I asked, is he still doing the transition -> athleticism thing? Someone said yes, so why not comment on it? This example is easy to remember because it is generally how he does things. Like I said, if he's gotten better, good for him....maybe he's worth a listen again. But the awful statistical analysis is what made me not listen to begin with.

Why do you make up things out of thin air for the sake of argument? You will never answer that one unfortunately. You won't answer why Bailey and Black are so different either, you will just say something like "it's obvious".
Click to expand...
Brother you are so hung up that you found an average number that factors in star players and somehow think that is a good example of shot distribution amongst the average NBA player. I cant help you.
 
fishonjazz said:
Cool. I was simply explaining to you why some people dont like Locke. He makes up stats that mean nothing to anyone and that can get annoying to some people.
Just speaking for myself, i dont care. I have no dog in the fight. I neve listen to locke or read anything he writes (if he even writes stuff) or follow him on anything. What locke says and does has no effect on me personally and I dont really know much about him or his content. I have simply read what others seem to not like about him and Im passing that information on to you in case you missed it.
Click to expand...
Locke does not make up transition stats. Locke did not invent transition being a marker for functional athletic ability.
 
Transition IS the best functional athletic ability number there is. Point blank period. IT's not perfect, but anyone who has ever played basketball knows the most athletic players excel in transition. And that might not always mean the most explosive or the fastest, but it's the complete combination of your athletic gifts being put to use.

Obviously it's not the only marker. There are plenty of defensively gifted athletes who dont have the same fine movement skills and hand/eye coordination things who are mediocre in transition but are obviously very athletic in others areas.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Locke does not make up transition stats. Locke did not invent transition being a marker for functional athletic ability.
Click to expand...
What does the transition stat look at? How does it work? What does it tell us? Is it on basketball reference.com? Is there somewhere I can go to compare royce oneals transition stats vs mikal bridges? Can you pull those up for me? If oneals transition stat is better than bridges does that mean he is the better athlete?
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Brother you are so hung up that you found an average number that factors in star players and somehow think that is a good example of shot distribution amongst the average NBA player. I cant help you.
Click to expand...

You do realize this "factors in star players angle" only makes it worse you lol. But it's a completely stupid idea to begin with.

It's just so funny that you decided to make up your argument because you had no real arguments. Like you still can't say why they are so different, because the reason why you said they are so different is completely fabricated lol.
 
fishonjazz said:
What does the transition stat look at? How does it work? What does it tell us? Is it on basketball reference.com? Is there somewhere I can go to compare royce oneals transition stats vs mikal bridges? Can you pull those up for me? If oneals transition stat is better than bridges does that mean he is the better athlete?
Click to expand...
Why does every basketball discussion with you devolve into you asking people to do your homework for you?
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Transition IS the best functional athletic ability number there is. Point blank period. IT's not perfect, but anyone who has ever played basketball knows the most athletic players excel in transition. And that might not always mean the most explosive or the fastest, but it's the complete combination of your athletic gifts being put to use.

Obviously it's not the only marker. There are plenty of defensively gifted athletes who dont have the same fine movement skills and hand/eye coordination things who are mediocre in transition but are obviously very athletic in others areas.
Click to expand...

Transition efficiency does not equal transition ability. The thing he does to determine who is good at transition doesn't even make sense. Here you are again, arguing against a strawman and completely ignoring the opposing argument.
 
KqWIN said:
You do realize this "factors in star players angle" only makes it worse you lol. But it's a completely stupid idea to begin with.

It's just so funny that you decided to make up your argument because you had no real arguments. Like you still can't say why they are so different, because the reason why you said they are so different is completely fabricated lol.
Click to expand...
Brother arguing with you is an exercise in futility. it's not even entertaining.
 
KqWIN said:
Transition efficiency does not equal transition ability. The thing he does to determine who is good at transition doesn't even make sense. Here you are again, arguing against a strawman and completely ignoring the opposing argument.
Click to expand...
Do you listen to him and know what he does or do you not? Make up your mind.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Do you listen to him and know what he does or do you not? Make up your mind.
Click to expand...

I literally had someone confirm he does this. Why are you so bent about me commenting about something that others confirmed.

For good measure, I listened to 3 minutes of one of his recent podcasts and it's confirmed. He uses transition percentile to say who is good at transition.
 
KqWIN said:
I literally had someone confirm he does this. Why are you so bent about me commenting about something that others confirmed.

For good measure, I listened to 3 minutes of one of his recent podcasts and it's confirmed. He uses transition percentile to say who is good at transition.
Click to expand...
Yes, you listend to 3 minutes of a podcast and surely got full context for everything he has been saying throughout a week of content.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Yes, you listend to 3 minutes of a podcast and surely got full context for everything he has been saying throughout a week of content.
Click to expand...

Does he or does he not use transition percentile? I have people telling me he uses transition percentile, one of those people being David Locke. Are you telling me that @Handlogten's Heros and David Locke himself are lying?

If you use transition percentile to judge transition ability, you are doing it wrong.
 
KqWIN said:
Does he or does he not use transition percentile? I have people telling me he uses transition percentile, one of those people being David Locke. Are you telling me that @Handlogten's Heros and David Locke himself are lying?

If you use transition percentile to judge transition ability, you are doing it wrong.
Click to expand...
I'm telling you he uses more than that and he does not preach it being the end all be all and anyone acting like that is being ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top