enrique

Squawkers
  • Content Count

    448
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Country

    United States

enrique last won the day on September 3 2019

enrique had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

779 Excellent

About enrique

  • Rank
    Role Player

Previous Fields

  • Fan since
    1982

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Texas

Recent Profile Visitors

812 profile views
  1. I am assuming they are using the per100 advanced stats which are radically skewed on Jones. This then warps his win shares and vorp. Using per100 jones has an offensive rating of over 130😳 regardless they are on crack😂😂😂
  2. enrique

    Teague 👶

    Wow! Just wow! What an idiotic interpretation of the Hawks. I wonder if he was leading the charge last year for Trae to be ROY since he led Atlanta to overachieve by 50% in their win totals🤓
  3. enrique

    Teague 👶

    So lots of speculation that this is part of a larger deal. Any truth? What is the limits on trading and then re-trading a player?
  4. enrique

    Teague 👶

    True-that!!! He did find some of his old 3p% near the end. I was just doke with him before then.
  5. enrique

    Teague 👶

    The more sad reality of Crabbe was that he shot his career worst numbers as a hawk.
  6. I totally agree that a good player will have the highest win shares for their team. I also agree that a great player on a bad team can have a decent win share rating. All that being said, there is NO player that could play for Atlanta right now that could have 9 win shares. Yet Harden is there. Why? Because no player can have much more than 35% of their teams win shares. Just go through the list and divide the players’ win shares by the teams’ wins and rank the percentages. What that means in practical terms is that the upper limit for any player will be about a third of the total wins their team accumulated throughout the season. Just look at the current Top 20 win share players. What do you notice? Is Clint Capela the 20th best player? Put him on the Hawks and remove Trae. He would never land in the Top 20 for Win Shares. It just is mathematically impossible.
  7. Thanks for resurrecting this thread! Definitely our supporting casts will effect jc development and performance.
  8. Incidentally, Middleton was the 5th highest WS on the Bucks in their 60 win season. And if you add up all the Bucks WS you will find that you come up with almost 60. The difference is due (like usual) to the players that are moved, waived, etc. In general, Basketball Reference has a 1:1 ratio now (and have done so for a while) on Win Shares.
  9. We certainly need to use it! Here are the current options: Use it either in a trade for or signing a legit player (such as proposed here) Gather 2-3 players to upgrade a few positions (if we were rounding out our roster for the final Championship push I'd say this) Watch it sit there and talk about what could happen if we use it while absolutely needing better players/talent on a nightly basis (the worst option)
  10. Yes. If you break it down per48. That being said. The idea is that you should be able to add up all the win shares (positive and negative) and get the wins for the team. Here is Basketball-Reference's explanation https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html
  11. That is the real downside to WinShares for sure...there is no player in the world that could play on the Hawks and have a very high WS this season. So using it to compare players is more like saying Player A is the 3rd best player on the team with the 5th best record in the NBA, rather than saying Player A is better than Player B. Player B may be the best player on a team that is really not going to win much at all this current season. Trae currently has 37% of the Hawks' win shares. Bledsoe currently has 10% of the Bucks' win shares. What can you conclude from that about the individual players? Not a hell of a lot except that Trae is more vital to the Hawks than Bledsoe is to the Bucks...
  12. As with all stats, player comparisons are like examining a diamond...if you only consider one facet you might overvalue or undervalue a particular diamond. I look at metrics such as PER, RAPM, VORP, etc. as differing ways of viewing player performance...different facets, if you will. Simple box score tallies are another facet. Taking all of them into consideration will give us a better perspective IMO of a player's value and contribution. All of that being said, the downfall of all stats in the NBA (except FT%) is that they are performed within the context of teammates of varying degrees of quality that operate amongst a league of teams of varying degrees of quality that operates within an overall league-era of varying degrees of quality. That is why there will NEVER be an open and closed statistical case for any player over another. There will always be some debate. Personally i don't mind that as long as people are cordial about it and realize the limits of what we have. It's part of what makes basketball fun to watch for me:)
  13. Here is a nice comparison I just ran on point guards in the NBA https://www.espn.com/nba/stats/player/_/position/point-guard/table/general/sort/PER/dir/desc Note that Dame is slightly higher than Trae. They post almost identical percentages and numbers across the board. Trae is slightly higher in PPG and APG. His larger TO numbers however reduce his PER so that Dame is listed above him on PER. PERsonally I don't mind PER when used this way. It is basing the numbers on a clear formula that isn't completely objective, but it attempts to balance possessions and usage alongside the traditional box scores.
  14. Here is the formula...I knew it was out there:) https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html