Rondo for Steve Nash

[BballTim]

Of the 36 games Shaq started, Rondo started in 26 of them, and distributed 15 or more assists 8 times. This means when Shaq and Rondo both started, Rondo had a 30% chance to get 15 or more assists, significantly higher than any other point in the season. The stats don't lie.

Mr. Coorelation, have you met Mr. Causation? Oh, I see you have!

That's your rebuttal? We're not working with independent and dependent variables in a laboratory. The stats mean there's a very good indication that Rondo's assist numbers were aided by having Shaq in the lineup, a direct contradiction to what Tim said.

Yes my rebuttal is that you're taking a statistical artifact, that Rondo had a ton of big assist games early in the year when the C's were the best team in the league, and twisting it to fit your argument.

That's not statistics, you've done zero statistical analysis to conclude if what you cite is significant. That's sports radio factoid work there, do you have any reason you picked 15 as your cut off? Do you examine using other end points?

They were the best team early in the league because Shaq was in the lineup. Actually, it is statistics. Whether or not it is in depth enough for you is your opinion. It is, however, still statistics.

  They were the best team in the league because of Shaq and the other four starters. They stumbled when Shaq was injured, just like they stumbled when Rondo was injured, just like they stumbled when KG was injured.

[KungPoweChicken]

Of the 36 games Shaq started, Rondo started in 26 of them, and distributed 15 or more assists 8 times. This means when Shaq and Rondo both started, Rondo had a 30% chance to get 15 or more assists, significantly higher than any other point in the season. The stats don't lie.

Mr. Coorelation, have you met Mr. Causation? Oh, I see you have!

That's your rebuttal? We're not working with independent and dependent variables in a laboratory. The stats mean there's a very good indication that Rondo's assist numbers were aided by having Shaq in the lineup, a direct contradiction to what Tim said.

Yes my rebuttal is that you're taking a statistical artifact, that Rondo had a ton of big assist games early in the year when the C's were the best team in the league, and twisting it to fit your argument.

That's not statistics, you've done zero statistical analysis to conclude if what you cite is significant. That's sports radio factoid work there, do you have any reason you picked 15 as your cut off? Do you examine using other end points?

They were the best team early in the league because Shaq was in the lineup. Actually, it is statistics. Whether or not it is in depth enough for you is your opinion. It is, however, still statistics.

If you are saying what I've written is not statistically significant, as in does it fall beyond the norm, then 99% of the stats people say on this board are not statistically significant.

I'm sorry if I didn't get my normal curve out for you.

What I'm saying is that I don't know if it is, and neither do you because you didn't even bother to look at his assist numbers in depth. You did a quick search, found a fact that supports your view, and ran with it. Then you attempted to play that "its a stat, they don't lie" card to make your argument stronger.

Bball raises an excellent point about Shaq's leaving and the drop off in Rondo's production not being synched up nearly as tightly as you claim. The team's production also was maintained without Shaq for a time.

You're right other people misuse stats all the time on this board. You got called out for it, you're still wrong.

My original argument, and the argument I still have, is that Rondo's big assists games had a relationship to having Shaq in the starting lineup. 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists. I don't see "how I'm misusing the stats." That's the stat. Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup.

[BballTim]

My original argument, and the argument I still have, is that Rondo's big assists games had a relationship to having Shaq in the starting lineup. 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists. I don't see "how I'm misusing the stats." That's the stat. Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup.

  It's still a bad argument because Rondo's big assist games didn't stop when Shaq was injured, they stopped over a month later, and they occurred at approximately the same rate as before during those 4+ weeks.

[Fafnir]

My original argument, and the argument I still have, is that Rondo's big assists games had a relationship to having Shaq in the starting lineup. 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists. I don't see "how I'm misusing the stats." That's the stat. Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup.

Rondo got 15 assists in 30% of the games that Shaq started is not the same as "Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup."

Not to mention you're still ignoring all my previous points. (why is 15 the magic number is still my biggest question)

On a 1 to 5 scale you get a 2 at understanding statistics and probability. That's my stat for the day.

[KungPoweChicken]

My original argument, and the argument I still have, is that Rondo's big assists games had a relationship to having Shaq in the starting lineup. 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists. I don't see "how I'm misusing the stats." That's the stat. Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup.

Rondo got 15 assists in 30% of the games that Shaq started is not the same as "Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup."

Not to mention you're still ignoring all my previous points. (why is 15 the magic number is still my biggest question)

On a 1 to 5 scale you get a 2 at understanding statistics and probability. That's my stat for the day.

Your stat about my understanding of statistics failed to reach statistical significance.

[CeltsAcumen]

Do you think Steve Nash is better than Rajon Rondo?

I dont, so know this deal is a waste.  It makes the Celtics older and trades away the only future star on the team.

Plus there is no guarantee that the Celtics win the championship with Nash.

[European NBA fan]

Do you think Steve Nash is better than Rajon Rondo?

I dont, so know this deal is a waste.  It makes the Celtics older and trades away the only future star on the team.

Plus there is no guarantee that the Celtics win the championship with Nash.

100 percent agree.

Nash played 4 minutes per game less than Rondo last season, and that gap is most likely going to get bigger.

The team loses it's defense first identity. And if you actually succeed in changing Nash into a defensive bulldog, you'll get even less minutes from him.

[BballTim]

My original argument, and the argument I still have, is that Rondo's big assists games had a relationship to having Shaq in the starting lineup. 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists. I don't see "how I'm misusing the stats." That's the stat. Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup.

Rondo got 15 assists in 30% of the games that Shaq started is not the same as "Rondo had a 30% chance of getting 15 or more assists with Shaq in the lineup."

Not to mention you're still ignoring all my previous points. (why is 15 the magic number is still my biggest question)

On a 1 to 5 scale you get a 2 at understanding statistics and probability. That's my stat for the day.

Your stat about my understanding of statistics failed to reach statistical significance.

  So basically it met the level of your original claim.

  Edit: Exceeded it, I guess, since your claim was incorrect.

[Finkelskyhook]

Rondo's defense is grossly overrated by inflated steal stats (gambling too much), playing with good/great defensive players, and playing with veterans who understand and are willing to commit to the team defense concept. Rondo's man defense is underwhelming. I can name off at least seven point guards who are better defensively than Rondo.

Los Nash on his best day makes Rondo on his worst day look like a hybrid of Dennis Johnson and Gary Payton in their primes.

I don't get how this trade is ever even proposed.

[JSD]

It all comes down to this:

1 year of Nash + More Cap Space in 2012 > Rondo this season + building around Rondo?

I say yes and would have a hard time not doing this deal. I do think we should squeeze a little more out of Phoenix. Maybe Lopez?

[Fafnir]

It all comes down to this:

1 year of Nash + More Cap Space in 2012 > Rondo this season + building around Rondo?

I say yes and would have a hard time not doing this deal. I do think we should squeeze a little more out of Phoenix. Maybe Lopez?

I don't think its a good idea to trade Rondo for more cap space.

Young talent is too precious for a rebuilding squad.

[arctic 3.0]

I can't believe this topic is still on the front page.

[Fafnir]

I can't believe this topic is still on the front page.

Then why did you just bump it? Also this sort of one-liner gets dangerously close to the sort of things that Roy has made clear aren't okay.

If you don't like a topic being on the latest topics, ignore it and move on. Or post other threads to push it down if you really must.

[JSD]

It all comes down to this:

1 year of Nash + More Cap Space in 2012 > Rondo this season + building around Rondo?

I say yes and would have a hard time not doing this deal. I do think we should squeeze a little more out of Phoenix. Maybe Lopez?

I don't think its a good idea to trade Rondo for more cap space.

Young talent is too precious for a rebuilding squad.

As last summer showed us cap space is more precious. This isn't your uncle's Celtic recruiters. Danny, Doc, ownership and the current Boston market make us more attractive to free agents and players seeking a new place to call home than ever before.


BTW, Fafnir, Lohan had a message for you  

[Fafnir]

If they want to create cap space it'd be better to dump Pierce's salary. They'd be able to find a taker. Better to trade Rondo for future picks.

Edit: No need for more OT!