Hollinger argues Minn worst then NJ. What's the point?

[jackson_34]

I rate Minny as the worse team too. NJ have a lot better talent than they've shown in the early part of the season and it'll show itself as the season progresses.

Minnesota is a train wreck. Their coach is deliberating putting his own players in situations that limit their abilities. Why the heck are pick and roll point guards running the Triangle? The Triangle needs a center who can pass the ball? When has that ever been Al Jefferson? No offensive cohesion + best players (Al, PGs) are all under-performing.

It would be a close battle between the two if Minny had a different head coach.

Good point, though I would like to see Love play the triangle, you would have to think with his passing ability he would do well in that offensive scheme (that said, the other players would still have to pick up their game).

Regarding the nets; Giving up Ryan Anderson to the Magic is looking like the biggest fail this season. They would have had a very sound looking core in Harris, Lee, Anderson, Douglas-Roberts and Lopez.

[Fan from VT]

Point differential is flawed here.   If it's a blowout by the 4th quarter and both teams are essentially playing their 9th through 12 men the final score won't be a true indication when you have non role players fluctuating the score near the end of the game.  Maybe a better indicator would be if we could find the average at what point in the game did the respective coaches waive the imaginary white flag and empty their benches.     

Excellent point.  TP.

Disagree. It's irrelevant. This is a common argument but it doesn't hold water. Point differential ideas are based on past evidence relating point differential to win-loss record on a vast level, so it has already internally corrected for the concept of "controlled blowouts" or taking your foot off the gas.


Edit: But it is true that sample size at this point is a problem

[Fafnir]

Point differential is flawed here.   If it's a blowout by the 4th quarter and both teams are essentially playing their 9th through 12 men the final score won't be a true indication when you have non role players fluctuating the score near the end of the game.  Maybe a better indicator would be if we could find the average at what point in the game did the respective coaches waive the imaginary white flag and empty their benches.     

Excellent point.  TP.

Disagree. It's irrelevant. This is a common argument but it doesn't hold water. Point differential ideas are based on past evidence relating point differential to win-loss record on a vast level, so it has already internally corrected for the concept of "controlled blowouts" or taking your foot off the gas.


Edit: But it is true that sample size at this point is a problem

I'd also point out that you anecdotal "took your foot off the gas" situation can also work the other way. When a team is down by 20 they also will quit during some games and the lead can grow to 30 or 40. (2008 Finals anyone?)

 As long as the sample size is sufficiently large point differential is a superior indicator of team strength than W-L record.

[Fafnir]

I rate Minny as the worse team too. NJ have a lot better talent than they've shown in the early part of the season and it'll show itself as the season progresses.

Minnesota is a train wreck. Their coach is deliberating putting his own players in situations that limit their abilities. Why the heck are pick and roll point guards running the Triangle? The Triangle needs a center who can pass the ball? When has that ever been Al Jefferson? No offensive cohesion + best players (Al, PGs) are all under-performing.

It would be a close battle between the two if Minny had a different head coach.

Good point, though I would like to see Love play the triangle, you would have to think with his passing ability he would do well in that offensive scheme (that said, the other players would still have to pick up their game).

Regarding the nets; Giving up Ryan Anderson to the Magic is looking like the biggest fail this season. They would have had a very sound looking core in Harris, Lee, Anderson, Douglas-Roberts and Lopez.

I disagree on that.

I think Anderson is looking better because he's on a much better team. He wasn't asked to do much other than bomb away from the 3-point line and play hard until Rashard got back.

Courtney Lee similarly flourished on Orlando before his playoff struggles.

[jackson_34]

I rate Minny as the worse team too. NJ have a lot better talent than they've shown in the early part of the season and it'll show itself as the season progresses.

Minnesota is a train wreck. Their coach is deliberating putting his own players in situations that limit their abilities. Why the heck are pick and roll point guards running the Triangle? The Triangle needs a center who can pass the ball? When has that ever been Al Jefferson? No offensive cohesion + best players (Al, PGs) are all under-performing.

It would be a close battle between the two if Minny had a different head coach.

Good point, though I would like to see Love play the triangle, you would have to think with his passing ability he would do well in that offensive scheme (that said, the other players would still have to pick up their game).

Regarding the nets; Giving up Ryan Anderson to the Magic is looking like the biggest fail this season. They would have had a very sound looking core in Harris, Lee, Anderson, Douglas-Roberts and Lopez.

I disagree on that.

I think Anderson is looking better because he's on a much better team. He wasn't asked to do much other than bomb away from the 3-point line and play hard until Rashard got back.

No question he's somewhat a product of the system, but I still rate him as a potentially solid role player. I'd take him over Boone anyday 

[nickagneta]

Why Hollinger, who is a slave to his own derived mathematical formulations didn't go to his other Hollinger team stats to compare the two teams is beyond me because in those stats, Minnesota looks like they might be the slightly better team.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats

In those stats Minnesota has a higher assist%, a lower turnover%, a higher eFG% and higher TS%, a lower defensive rebound rate, a higher offensive rebound rate and an almost identical rebound rate(48.0 to 48.1) and differential in the offensive and defensive efficiencies(13.8 to 13).

Funny how when Hollinger wants to make stat based arguments he always excludes anything that doesn't prove his point....even his own derived statistics.

[Fafnir]

I rate Minny as the worse team too. NJ have a lot better talent than they've shown in the early part of the season and it'll show itself as the season progresses.

Minnesota is a train wreck. Their coach is deliberating putting his own players in situations that limit their abilities. Why the heck are pick and roll point guards running the Triangle? The Triangle needs a center who can pass the ball? When has that ever been Al Jefferson? No offensive cohesion + best players (Al, PGs) are all under-performing.

It would be a close battle between the two if Minny had a different head coach.

Good point, though I would like to see Love play the triangle, you would have to think with his passing ability he would do well in that offensive scheme (that said, the other players would still have to pick up their game).

Regarding the nets; Giving up Ryan Anderson to the Magic is looking like the biggest fail this season. They would have had a very sound looking core in Harris, Lee, Anderson, Douglas-Roberts and Lopez.

I disagree on that.

I think Anderson is looking better because he's on a much better team. He wasn't asked to do much other than bomb away from the 3-point line and play hard until Rashard got back.

No question he's somewhat a product of the system, but I still rate him as a potentially solid role player. I'd take him over Boone anyday 

Have you read the articles on the Vince Carter trade? They wanted Courtney Lee and had to give up Ryan Andersen for him.

http://www.orlandomagicdaily.com/?p=444&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

So its not fair to compare him to Josh Boone, you really want to compare him to Lee.

[Fafnir]

Why Hollinger, who is a slave to his own derived mathematical formulations didn't go to his other Hollinger team stats to compare the two teams is beyond me because in those stats, Minnesota looks like they might be the slightly better team.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats

In those stats Minnesota has a higher assist%, a lower turnover%, a higher eFG% and higher TS%, a lower defensive rebound rate, a higher offensive rebound rate and an almost identical rebound rate(48.0 to 48.1) and differential in the offensive and defensive efficiencies(13.8 to 13).

Funny how when Hollinger wants to make stat based arguments he always excludes anything that doesn't prove his point....even his own derived statistics.

nick even you have to know you're being ridiculous here you can't just compare stat categories like that to assess team strength. You have to look at the whole picture.

All those stats you summed up basically mean that Minnesota is a better offensive team than NJ. Which is reflected by their offensive rating! They're much worse defensively though, and their defense is bad enough to make their efficiency differential less than the Nets.

If you're going to rip Hollinger's stats at least take the time to understand them.

[nickagneta]

Why Hollinger, who is a slave to his own derived mathematical formulations didn't go to his other Hollinger team stats to compare the two teams is beyond me because in those stats, Minnesota looks like they might be the slightly better team.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats

In those stats Minnesota has a higher assist%, a lower turnover%, a higher eFG% and higher TS%, a lower defensive rebound rate, a higher offensive rebound rate and an almost identical rebound rate(48.0 to 48.1) and differential in the offensive and defensive efficiencies(13.8 to 13).

Funny how when Hollinger wants to make stat based arguments he always excludes anything that doesn't prove his point....even his own derived statistics.

nick even you have to know you're being ridiculous here you can't just compare stat categories like that to assess team strength. You have to look at the whole picture.

All those stats you summed up basically mean that Minnesota is a better offensive team than NJ. Which is reflected by their offensive rating! They're much worse defensively though, and their defense is bad enough to make their efficiency differential less than the Nets.

If you're going to rip Hollinger's stats at least take the time to understand them.

"Take the time to understand them?"

That's fairly insulting.

I understand them completely. Since when is the defensive side of the ball the only way to gauge how good a team is when the two teams in question are fairly bad. Both have defensive efficiencies over 103 and Minnesota's higher defensive efficiency can be attributed to the fact that they play at a faster pace(close to 3 more possessions per game).

To me given these facts it seems to me that both teams have extremely similar and comparatively bad defenses and so why not look at the offensive statistics?

One team shoots better, one team passes better, one team turns the ball over less and both teams have comparably bad defenses and rebound about the same. Both teams have had injuries. Both teams have had long losing streaks and one team has won a game versus a top 10 team in the league on the road and beaten the other team in question.   

So why is Hollinger pointing primarily to point differential and ignoring these other factors, some of them his own? Seems to me it's someone else(Hollinger) who isn't looking at the big picture.

Also, next time try not being so condescending.

[MBunge]

As long as the sample size is sufficiently large point differential is a superior indicator of team strength than W-L record.

If you're talking about fantasy leagues or computer games, sure.  In the real world, wins and losses are what count.

Mike

[Fafnir]

Why Hollinger, who is a slave to his own derived mathematical formulations didn't go to his other Hollinger team stats to compare the two teams is beyond me because in those stats, Minnesota looks like they might be the slightly better team.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats

In those stats Minnesota has a higher assist%, a lower turnover%, a higher eFG% and higher TS%, a lower defensive rebound rate, a higher offensive rebound rate and an almost identical rebound rate(48.0 to 48.1) and differential in the offensive and defensive efficiencies(13.8 to 13).

Funny how when Hollinger wants to make stat based arguments he always excludes anything that doesn't prove his point....even his own derived statistics.

nick even you have to know you're being ridiculous here you can't just compare stat categories like that to assess team strength. You have to look at the whole picture.

All those stats you summed up basically mean that Minnesota is a better offensive team than NJ. Which is reflected by their offensive rating! They're much worse defensively though, and their defense is bad enough to make their efficiency differential less than the Nets.

If you're going to rip Hollinger's stats at least take the time to understand them.

"Take the time to understand them?"

That's fairly insulting.

I don't mean to insult you nick, but it appears to be accurate in this case.

Both have defensive efficiencies over 103 and Minnesota's higher defensive efficiency can be attributed to the fact that they play at a faster pace(close to 3 more possessions per game).

Defensive efficiency is controlled for pace nick.

Def Eff Defensive Efficiency is the number of points a team allows per 100 possessions.

Passing, shooting, rebounding, not turning the ball over all are factors that go into offensive efficiency. They're not virtues in and of themselves, this isn't a beauty contest. The goal is to score the ball every time you have possession and prevent your opponent from scoring each time he has it. So Minnesota's superior passing, shooting, and turn over rate all mean they are a better offensive team than the Nets. Their defense is worse, significantly worse. (3.4 points per 100 possesion which by the way is about the same difference between the C's defense and the Mavericks 3.8 per 100 possessions)

If you want to argue head to head trumps that because they're both very close, that's fine I don't disagree!

But you clearly are not looking closely at what the numbers are saying, you dismiss them with incorrect statements and don't correctly attribute the relative difference that there is between the teams.

[Fafnir]

As long as the sample size is sufficiently large point differential is a superior indicator of team strength than W-L record.

If you're talking about fantasy leagues or computer games, sure.  In the real world, wins and losses are what count.

Mike

No in real life point differential is a better predictor of future success, both in the regular season and playoffs. I never said point differential is what "counts". I should have said its a better predictor for future results, that is what I meant. In  the end who raises the banner is what counts.

[nickagneta]

Actually Faf, it's you who aren't understanding this.

Shooting percentages, offensive rebounding passing and turnover statistics are in way way shape or form a part of the offensive efficiency formulation. They are their own separate stats. That like saying steals and blocks and defensive rebounding is a part of the defensive efficiency stat. They aren't. Efficiency stats are simply how often a team scores in 100 possessions. That's it.

And pace is not a part of those stats nor have they been taken out of them. teams that play at a faster rate just about always have higher defensive efficiencies because the pace often dictates the quality of the defense being played. Teams playing at faster rates will expend more energy on the offensive side and wear themselves down more and hence give up more points in 100 possessions. In the large picture, pace is not removed from the proper interpretation of offensive and defensive efficiencies.

So again, no need to be insulting, in this case it is not warranted, needed or is your statement accurate. How about you discuss this without the semi veiled insults.

[xmuscularghandix]

Minnesota isn't missing their best player, so i agree.

[fairweatherfan]

Point differential is flawed here.   If it's a blowout by the 4th quarter and both teams are essentially playing their 9th through 12 men the final score won't be a true indication when you have non role players fluctuating the score near the end of the game.  Maybe a better indicator would be if we could find the average at what point in the game did the respective coaches waive the imaginary white flag and empty their benches.     

Excellent point.  TP.

Disagree. It's irrelevant. This is a common argument but it doesn't hold water. Point differential ideas are based on past evidence relating point differential to win-loss record on a vast level, so it has already internally corrected for the concept of "controlled blowouts" or taking your foot off the gas.


Edit: But it is true that sample size at this point is a problem

Eh, it may well be true that pt differential breaks down at unusually low levels, because teams don't behave "normally" when a game has become a blowout.  It doesn't change the usefulness of differential as an overall predictor, but it may not have the same predictive validity with teams that are getting blown out 50% or more of the time, like NJ and Minny.  I don't know of anyone who's looked at it from this angle, but when predictors do break down it tends to be at the extremes.