Seeing AL Objectively - SLCdunk article

[theNBAnerd]

I can appreciate that, and I'm sure you can appreciate why an analysis without that rigor is less convincing than one that at least starts with evey game and takes all the games with a set criteria.

again, my set criteria was that i looked at every game with a final margin of 15 or less, then looked to see if the margin was single digits for most of the quarter.

that's fairly objective, so i'm not sure how that's any less convincing.

would you like the sample better if the numbers said what you want them to? i'm not trying to be a dick with that question, i' would just honestly ask if it's that you disagree with my inclusion/exclusion of certain games or if you're just haggling with me on sample because the data backed up my original point.

 

[billyshelby]

when al creates his own shot, he does it ONE way and has a PPS of barely over 1. peul can create his own shot out of the post, from the elbow, off the dribble. paul's better as the pick man in the pick and roll. he moves off the ball better. he cuts (i was going to say he cuts better than al, but the reality is that al never cuts).

Paul literally can't do anything you just said with any regularity. His ability to score on his own from any spot depends heavily on matchups. He is reasonably effective in the PnR and that's a weapon he can still develop. But make Paul start creating as many shots as Al does every night, and his PPS will plummet.

 

[theNBAnerd]

Paul literally can't do anything you just said with any regularity. His ability to score on his own from any spot depends heavily on matchups. He is reasonably effective in the PnR and that's a weapon he can still develop. But make Paul start creating as many shots as Al does every night, and his PPS will plummet.

that's what everybody has assumed all throughout paul's career... only guess what... his attempts per 36 and his usage have climbed year-to-year all except once, and yet his TS% and eFG% have been remarkably consistent. his point per shot has been between 1.23 and 1.41 all six years in the league. his TS% by year is 57, 55, 58, 57, 58, 55.

i get all the reasons why people assume that "paul can't maintain his efficiency with more attempts," but he has defied that logic his entire career.

 

[One Brow]

again, my set criteria was that i looked at every game with a final margin of 15 or less, then looked to see if the margin was single digits for most of the quarter.

that's fairly objective, so i'm not sure how that's any less convincing.

How many minutes is "most of the quarter"?

would you like the sample better if the numbers said what you want them to?

I'd like it better is you 1) looked at every game to see if it meets the criteria or not (some do get blown out late in the fourth quarter, and it only takes 7 consecutive points to from "less than 10" to "more than 15"), 2) set precise quanta to ("at least 6:01 with the difference in score being under 9"), and 3) stopped relying on your judgement for how close things are.

i'm not trying to be a dick with that question, i' would just honestly ask if it's that you disagree with my inclusion/exclusion of certain games or if you're just haggling with me on sample because the data backed up my original point.

I don't have any particular attachment to Jefferson. If he's traded away before the season starts, I'll neither weep nor jump for joy (depending on the person being brought back, of course).

However, I will say that any time a survey or sample that I conduct confirms my original points, I take that as a sign I may be doing something wrong.

 

[theNBAnerd]

How many minutes is "most of the quarter"?

umm, 6+.

I'd like it better is you 1) looked at every game to see if it meets the criteria or not (some do get blown out late in the fourth quarter, and it only takes 7 consecutive points to from "less than 10" to "more than 15"), 2) set precise quanta to ("at least 6:01 with the difference in score being under 9"), and 3) stopped relying on your judgement for how close things are.

oh come on... now you're just mincing. my sample was plenty objective. any game that was decided by 15 or less and had a close margin through most of the 4th can accurately described as "anybody's game." any game that doesn't meet those criteria probably doesn't belong in this study to begin with.

thing is, if you could point to one single game that was in the sample that shouldn't have been (or vice versa), we'd be talking about that. instead, you're just trying to attack the IDEA of my methodology because you don't like that it didn't say what you thought it would say.

seriously, show me one included/excluded game you have a problem with and we'll discuss why it should or shouldn't belong. my guess is you have none.

I don't have any particular attachment to Jefferson. If he's traded away before the season starts, I'll neither weep nor jump for joy (depending on the person being brought back, of course).

However, I will say that any time a survey or sample that I conduct confirms my original points, I take that as a sign I may be doing something wrong.

so my analysis must be wrong simply because it confirmed my original assertion? haha. ok, dude.

 

[One Brow]

oh come on... now you're just mincing. my sample was plenty objective. any game that was decided by 15 or less and had a close margin through most of the 4th can accurately described as "anybody's game."

I don't think you understand what "objective" means.

so my analysis must be wrong simply because it confirmed my original assertion? haha. ok, dude.

Not must be wrong, but must be questioned. The most natural thing in the world for a human to do is convince themselves that they are right.

 

[franklin]

Someone doesn't understand the unimportance of clutch shooting & high importance of playing team ball in these situations. Millsap has been visually awful when the focal point. He's not better than Kobe Bryant because he had 2 or 3 excellent 4th quarters last year. And LAL shouldn't trade Kobe over Meta because Meta shoots 35% that Kobe does in 82games.com's clutch statistic.

And none of this changes the fact that Jefferson continually faced double & triple teams inside an offense that refused to produce open shooters in clutch situations. And none of this changes the fact that the Jazz had one of the top offenses last season because Jefferson saw so many touches.



The relevancy of all this Jefferson hate will not mean anything until after he is surrounded by competent shooters. Again, the Jazz had one of the best offenses in the league despite being at the bottom in 3 point shooting. So yeah, let's hyperventilate & blame Jefferson for carrying a shoddy team to a 54% win record. He was obviously not the reason the Jazz had a winning record last year.

 

[pickledXgrandma]

Someone doesn't understand the unimportance of clutch shooting & high importance of playing team ball in these situations. Millsap has been visually awful when the focal point. He's not better than Kobe Bryant because he had 2 or 3 excellent 4th quarters last year. And LAL shouldn't trade Kobe over Meta because Meta shoots 35% that Kobe does in 82games.com's clutch statistic.

And none of this changes the fact that Jefferson continually faced double & triple teamsg inside an offense that refused to produce open shooters in clutch situations. And none of this changes the fact that the Jazz had one of the top offenses last season because Jefferson saw so many touches.



The relevancy of all this Jefferson hate will not mean anything until after he is surrounded by competent shooters. Again, the Jazz had one of the best offenses in the league despite being at the bottom in 3 point shooting. So yeah, let's hyperventilate & blame Jefferson for carrying a shoddy team to a 54% win record. He was obviously not the reason the Jazz had a winning record last year.

How does Big Als man gravy taste?

 

[theNBAnerd]

I don't think you understand what "objective" means.



Not must be wrong, but must be questioned. The most natural thing in the world for a human to do is convince themselves that they are right.

1) i had a hypothesis
2) i tested it by looking at all losses that met a certain criteria
3) the losses confirmed my hypothesis
4) you questioned the method and said we needed to look at close wins, too
5) i tested the hypothesis again by looking at all wins that met a certain criteria
6) the wins confirmed my hypothesis
7) you are still arguing, but instead of focusing on the findings, you're now in a smoke-and-mirrors thing about methodology because you know that the numbers say what the numbers say.

you still have yet to point out a single game that my allegedly subjective criteria incorrectly ruled in or out of the sample. probably because you don't really care and you just want to piss all over the study that YOU asked me to expand.

 

[One Brow]

you still have yet to point out a single game that my allegedly subjective criteria incorrectly ruled in or out of the sample. probably because you don't really care and you just want to piss all over the study that YOU asked me to expand.

How would one go about saying that a game was correctly or incorrectly ruled out based on subjective criteria?

You seem annoyed that I don't find your work convincing. I'm just explaining the type of standards needed to make it convincing. I don't see why your convincing me needs to be a priority in your life. Maybe Millsap is the greatest thing since sliced bread in the fourth quarter and Jefferson is stale toast. All I know is that the only study I know of that looked at every game, with specific pre-defined crieria, finds the performance to be about equal. That's does mean they are equal, of course.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

How does Big Als man gravy taste?

The most underrated poster on the board folks.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Millsap also misses a lot more with that contact. The result is a basically even eFG%. One gets free throws, the other makes more baskets. So, how is one performance much better than the other?

My numbers include all games, wins and losses.

I realize you have no obligation to me.

My eyes must be playing tricks on me because Millsap has shot a better percentage from the field both years that they've played together. On top of Millsap running the floor, being able to guard anyone in the PnR, and again, getting to the line. And having a much better eFG%.

So yeah, my eyes must be going out of their minds.

 

[NAOS]

My eyes must be playing tricks on me because Millsap has shot a better percentage from the field both years that they've played together. On top of Millsap running the floor, being able to guard anyone in the PnR, and again, getting to the line. And having a much better eFG%.

So yeah, my eyes must be going out of their minds.

I don't know how much of this thread you've read, but there has been a heaping amount of distrust of the eyes.

But, One Brow has taught me something about statistics methodology, so I'll give some rep.

One Brow, is it still true that you don't get to see many of the games?

 

[theNBAnerd]

How would one go about saying that a game was correctly or incorrectly ruled out based on subjective criteria?

You seem annoyed that I don't find your work convincing. I'm just explaining the type of standards needed to make it convincing. I don't see why your convincing me needs to be a priority in your life. Maybe Millsap is the greatest thing since sliced bread in the fourth quarter and Jefferson is stale toast. All I know is that the only study I know of that looked at every game, with specific pre-defined crieria, finds the performance to be about equal. That's does mean they are equal, of course.

not that it matters, but my study "looked at every game, with specific pre-defined criteria." i started with the entire schedule and selected every game where:

a) final margin </= 15, AND
b) for at least half of the 4th quarter, the margin < 10

but whatever. you thinking i'm wrong just because i'd prefer to be right is what i consider to be a faulty analysis.

My eyes must be playing tricks on me because Millsap has shot a better percentage from the field both years that they've played together. On top of Millsap running the floor, being able to guard anyone in the PnR, and again, getting to the line. And having a much better eFG%.

So yeah, my eyes must be going out of their minds.

and has better range outside 10 feet, and can score from more angles/spots on the floor, and attacks the rim, and isn't afraid of contact on either end of the floor, and hustles more....

PPS in the two years they have played together - paul 1.28 vs. al 1.09. that is a HUUUUGE difference. even if we use point per "attempt", which basically forgives the fact that al shots a free throw for about every 6th FGA (compared to 1 in 3 for paul), the difference is still 1.12 to 1.04 in paul's favor over the two years.

 

[One Brow]

But, One Brow has taught me something about statistics methodology, so I'll give some rep.

One Brow, is it still true that you don't get to see many of the games?

Just the ones televised nationally. Just last year I got NBA TV, that helped a little.

 

[One Brow]

but whatever. you thinking i'm wrong just because i'd prefer to be right is what i consider to be a faulty analysis.

That's not what I said. I'd re-word it, but I'm not sure it would matter.

 

[pickledXgrandma]

The most underrated poster on the board folks.

I never get the credit I deserve damn it! If you guys were all my bitches, you'd be in the kitchen makin me sammiches and bringin me nattylights (except you wes)

 

[franklin]

Jefferson is responsible for most of Millsap's scoring efficiency. If Sap were the one double teamed, leaving Jefferson man to man post play, then Jefferson would shoot 60+ % & Sap <40%.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jyv2avqHs4

Play 1: Jefferson double teamed, allowing Millsap prime scoring position from the block.
Play 2: Jefferson assists to Millsap.
Play 3: Jefferson defers to Millsap's better position. Nice move & score by Sap, horrible help d by MIA.
Play 4: Jefferson double teamed with triple team coming after Sap gets the ball. Nice move by Millsap for a semi-off balance shot.
Play 5: Williams make an incredible pass. Sap layup. "& how much better does Deron Williams make Paul Millsap?"
Play 6: Designed play. Jefferson assists the lob layup.
Play 7: Deron Williams collapses 4 defenders in & assists Sap's layup.
Play 8: Right place right time. Jefferson screens for Sap cleanup.
Play 9: Good team execution. Sap layup.
Play 10: Over the top of PnR focus on D-Will, help defense can't leave Jefferson to cover Millsap, but he get's the stat.
Play 11: Jefferson & D-Will double teams allows Sap an open jumper.
Play 12: Millsap passes up a nice assisted jumper from Jefferson to drive & score.
Play 13: PnR with Jefferson leaves nobody to guard Sap. Open jumper again.
Play 14: Ilgauskus leaves Millsap on the baseline with the ball to double team Jefferson, leaving lane wide open for Millsap.
Play 15: Nice off ball read by Sap & assist by AK for easy layup.
Play 16: Poor defense leads to Millsap's man covering CJ, who passes to wide open Sap for a layup.
Play 17: Double team Williams, leaves Millsap wide open.
Play 18: Another wide open 3.
Play 19: Another 3. Nice shot.
Play 20: Hero

 

[NAOS]

We may have gone so far down the rabbit hole of the Jefferson-Millsap debate that it seems like the Millsap crowd might be arguing that he's capable of being the anchor of the offense. That's definitely not what I'm saying. Millsap is a great second option. Jefferson knows one way to play, and that's low left blockism. In other words, he, too, isn't fit to anchor an offense that has a chance of contending.

 

[franklin]

In other words, he, too, isn't fit to anchor an offense that has a chance of contending.

Not true. Look what happens when you surround Jefferson with quality players (such as Millsap) who can shoot & execute. Jefferson doesn't need the ball to be a highly effective weapon. Maximizing Jefferson to me would mean using him as a distraction so other players could get high % shots. The defense would be better suited to control transition too. But that requires players who are capable of scoring one on one, reading, & timing cuts & screens.

NAOS, you may remember me asking for Corbin to utilize this exact last play just prior to the SAS blowout.