Teague is #12 in Assist/48 min in the entire NBA

[jerrywest]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nbaassists&league=nba&split=0&sort=asts&avg=48&qual=true&season=2010&seasontype=2&pos=all

Looks like we are in safe hands.

[exodus]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nbaassists&league=nba&split=0&sort=asts&avg=48&qual=true&season=2010&seasontype=2&pos=all

Looks like we are in safe hands.

His ball handling and court vision are better than i expected. But his jumper....ugh. And he needs to learn how to finish better inside which i believe he will. But that jumper is a major problem.

Edited November 10, 2009 by exodus

[thefloydian]

His ball handling and court vision are better than i expected. But his jumper....ugh. And he needs to learn how to finish better inside which i believe he will. But that jumper is a major problem.

I thought Teague shot pretty well in college. I might be making that up, but I think his shot will come around. It's not like he's played very much so far.

[exodus]

I just noticed that Teague is 5th in the league in steals per 48 minutes. Granted it is a small sample size but it is encouraging.

[niremetal]

I just noticed that Teague is 5th in the league in steals per 48 minutes. Granted it is a small sample size but it is encouraging.

Followed by Marco Belinelli, Sam Young, and Dominic McGuire. Just sayin.

Per 36/48 minute stats are a very poor indicator of what a player would produce if he actually had to play starters' minutes and against the other team's best players. Also, Chuck Hayes is 3rd in the league, in case you needed proof that you can't tell too much 7 games into the season even for guys who do play major minutes.

I know you realize that, but I figure it's worth emphasizing.

Edited November 10, 2009 by niremetal

[jerrywest]

I just noticed that Teague is 5th in the league in steals per 48 minutes. Granted it is a small sample size but it is encouraging.

In the first game or two Teague looked like a deer in the head light while defending. Suddenly he realized that he is quicket than everybody. In the last 5 games he had 5 steals in 58 minutes (1 dnp-cd). That's a better rate than #1 Rondo.

Teague has a bad form, but its nothing like Chillz.

Chillz shoots like a littler girl, from his chest, but Teague shoots like a big girl, from his right shoulder. A much higher point of release.

Chillz can't create his own shot, but Teague can create his own shot against anybody in less than 4 seconds.

Teague was shooting really well in college. I think he'll come around.

[jerrywest]

Followed by Marco Belinelli, Sam Young, and Dominic McGuire. Just sayin.

Per 36/48 minute stats are a very poor indicator of what a player would produce if he actually had to play starters' minutes and against the other team's best players. Also, Chuck Hayes is 3rd in the league, in case you needed proof that you can't tell too much 7 games into the season even for guys who do play major minutes.

I know you realize that, but I figure it's worth emphasizing.

I agree, but Teague has unreal quickness that can wreck havoc. Reminds me of Speedy Claxton in his youth.

[jy23]

His ball handling and court vision are better than i expected. But his jumper....ugh. And he needs to learn how to finish better inside which i believe he will. But that jumper is a major problem.

At least he's getting inside!! That alone is making me happy, he's fearless when it comes to driving the lane n like u said I'm pretty sure that he'll start finishing better as he gets more oppertunities

[exodus]

Followed by Marco Belinelli, Sam Young, and Dominic McGuire. Just sayin.

Per 36/48 minute stats are a very poor indicator of what a player would produce if he actually had to play starters' minutes and against the other team's best players. Also, Chuck Hayes is 3rd in the league, in case you needed proof that you can't tell too much 7 games into the season even for guys who do play major minutes.

I know you realize that, but I figure it's worth emphasizing.

Actually per minute stats have proven to be a very reliable indicator of what players produce when/if they become a starter or play more minutes. However you obviously need a bigger sample size than 7 games for them to be reliable.

[AHF]

Actually per minute stats have proven to be a very reliable indicator of what players produce when/if they become a starter or play more minutes. However you obviously need a bigger sample size than 7 games for them to be reliable.

Agreed.

[niremetal]

Actually per minute stats have proven to be a very reliable indicator of what players produce when/if they become a starter or play more minutes.

"Very reliable" is a huge overstatement. It has been an indicator for some (ZBo and Kirilenko come to mind), but it has not been for many others - as even a brief glance at the per-36 minute stats for past season on Basketball Reference will tell you. And obviously, the fewer the MPG averaged, the less reliable the indicator. I am particularly wary of extrapolating for PGs, considering how many (Howard Eisley, Beno Udrih, Jacques Vaughn, and Dan Dickau immediately come to mind) never actually put together seasons as starters resembling the per-36 minute stats they produced right before their "promotion." Now granted, I do NOT think Teague is like any of those guys. But per-36 minute production is not "very reliable." My guesstimate is that it misses at least a third of the time when the MPG is below 16mpg (ie 1/3 of the game). To me, that makes it a poor indicator (although "very poor" was an overstatement on my part).

Edited November 10, 2009 by niremetal

[exodus]

"Very reliable" is a huge overstatement. It has been an indicator for some (ZBo and Kirilenko come to mind), but it has not been for many others - as even a brief glance at the per-36 minute stats for past season on Basketball Reference will tell you. And obviously, the fewer the MPG averaged, the less reliable the indicator. I am particularly wary of extrapolating for PGs, considering how many (Howard Eisley, Beno Udrih, Jacques Vaughn, and Dan Dickau immediately come to mind) never actually put together seasons as starters resembling the per-36 minute stats they produced right before their "promotion." Now granted, I do NOT think Teague is like any of those guys. But per-36 minute production is not "very reliable." My guesstimate is that it misses at least a third of the time when the MPG is below 16mpg (ie 1/3 of the game). To me, that makes it a poor indicator (although "very poor" was an overstatement on my part).

Per minute stats have been proven to be a very reliable indicator. Zaza is a perfect example. Look at his per minute stats with the Bucks and then compare them as a starter here. There are plenty of examples which have shown time and again it is a reliable indicator assuming a legit sample size.

[AHF]

I am particularly wary of extrapolating for PGs, considering how many (Howard Eisley, Beno Udrih, Jacques Vaughn, and Dan Dickau immediately come to mind) never actually put together seasons as starters resembling the per-36 minute stats they produced right before their "promotion."

Do you realize that every example you gave actually supports the reliability of per minute statistics? In every case, the players put together better per minute statistics after they got their significant jump in minutes.

Beno Udrih 2006-07 Season Before Bump In Minutes (13.0 mpg) - 12.9 pp36, 4.6 ap36, 10.3 PER

Beno Udrih 2007-08 Season After Bump In Minutes (32.0 mpg) - 14.4 ppg36, 4.9 ap36, 13.3 PER

Beno Udrih 2008-09 Season After Bump In Minutes (31.1 mpg) - 12.7 pp36, 5.4 ap36, 12.3 PER

Howard Eisley 1996-97 Season Before Bump In Minutes (13.2 mpg) - 12.2 pp36, 6.6 ap36, 11.1 PER

Howard Eisley 1997-98 Season After Bump In Minutes (21.0 mpg) - 13.2 pp36, 7.2 ap36, 13.6 PER

Howard Eisley 1998-99 Season After Bump In Minutes (20.8 mpg) - 12.8 pp36, 6.4 ap36, 11.7 PER

Jacque Vaughn 1999-00 Season Before Bump In Minutes (11.3 mpg) - 11.8 pp36, 4.9 ap36, 9.2 PER

Jacque Vaughn 2000-01 Season After Bump In Minutes (19.8 mpg) - 11.1 pp36, 7.2 ap36, 12.8 PER

Jacque Vaughn 2001-02 Season After Bump In Minutes (22.6 mpg) - 10.5 pp36, 6.8 ap36, 13.1 PER

Dan Dickau

Dan Dickau 2003-04 Season Before Bump In Minutes (6.8 mpg) - 11.6 pp36, 4.7 ap36, 9.0 PER

Dan Dickau 2004-05 Season After Bump In Minutes (29.4 mpg) - 15.3 pp36, 6.0 ap36, 14.9 PER

Dan Dickau 2005-06 Season After Bump In Minutes (12.3 mpg) - 9.5 pp36, 6.2 ap36, 10.4 PER

[vdunkndunk]

His ball handling and court vision are better than i expected. But his jumper....ugh. And he needs to learn how to finish better inside which i believe he will. But that jumper is a major problem.

I totally agree with this. Teague has great athleticism, can get in the lane seemingly whenever he wants, and he's done a great job of breaking down the defense and coming up with kickouts and assists, and he's been good in transition (either finishing or creating a shot for others). He's also had a lot of drives to the basket where he put it up off the backboard and didn't get a bounce, but it looks like he will straighten that out before long. But if he can't hit jumpshots, it might get a lot harder for him to use his quickness - and his form isn't all that good. He shot pretty well from 3-point range at Wake Forest, but I'm not sure what kind of a jumpshooter he'll be in the NBA.

[Diesel]

I totally agree with this. Teague has great athleticism, can get in the lane seemingly whenever he wants, and he's done a great job of breaking down the defense and coming up with kickouts and assists, and he's been good in transition (either finishing or creating a shot for others). He's also had a lot of drives to the basket where he put it up off the backboard and didn't get a bounce, but it looks like he will straighten that out before long. But if he can't hit jumpshots, it might get a lot harder for him to use his quickness - and his form isn't all that good. He shot pretty well from 3-point range at Wake Forest, but I'm not sure what kind of a jumpshooter he'll be in the NBA.

No. He's a godsend for our team. He doesn't need to be another three point shooter. Him being a drive and dish guy is great for us. We have a lot of guys who hang outside. They tend to stretch the defense. He actually creates for himself and for Smoove/Horf/Zaza... because his driving draws defenders his way. Teams can't play too far back because we have other shooters. When he has the ball, he can drive the lane and hurt people. We don't need another Jason Terry, we need a guy who is fearless and that's what we got.

[niremetal]

Do you realize that every example you gave actually supports the reliability of per minute statistics? In every case, the players put together better per minute statistics after they got their significant jump in minutes.

Beno Udrih 2006-07 Season Before Bump In Minutes (13.0 mpg) - 12.9 pp36, 4.6 ap36, 10.3 PER

Beno Udrih 2007-08 Season After Bump In Minutes (32.0 mpg) - 14.4 ppg36, 4.9 ap36, 13.3 PER

Beno Udrih 2008-09 Season After Bump In Minutes (31.1 mpg) - 12.7 pp36, 5.4 ap36, 12.3 PER

Howard Eisley 1996-97 Season Before Bump In Minutes (13.2 mpg) - 12.2 pp36, 6.6 ap36, 11.1 PER

Howard Eisley 1997-98 Season After Bump In Minutes (21.0 mpg) - 13.2 pp36, 7.2 ap36, 13.6 PER

Howard Eisley 1998-99 Season After Bump In Minutes (20.8 mpg) - 12.8 pp36, 6.4 ap36, 11.7 PER

Jacque Vaughn 1999-00 Season Before Bump In Minutes (11.3 mpg) - 11.8 pp36, 4.9 ap36, 9.2 PER

Jacque Vaughn 2000-01 Season After Bump In Minutes (19.8 mpg) - 11.1 pp36, 7.2 ap36, 12.8 PER

Jacque Vaughn 2001-02 Season After Bump In Minutes (22.6 mpg) - 10.5 pp36, 6.8 ap36, 13.1 PER

Dan Dickau

Dan Dickau 2003-04 Season Before Bump In Minutes (6.8 mpg) - 11.6 pp36, 4.7 ap36, 9.0 PER

Dan Dickau 2004-05 Season After Bump In Minutes (29.4 mpg) - 15.3 pp36, 6.0 ap36, 14.9 PER

Dan Dickau 2005-06 Season After Bump In Minutes (12.3 mpg) - 9.5 pp36, 6.2 ap36, 10.4 PER

You're comparing the wrong things. I said they never put together seasons as starters (ie their ACTUAL PER GAME stats, not their extrapolated and therefore occasionally misleading per-36 minute stats) resembling their pre-promotion per-36 minute stats.

Howard Eisley, 1996-1997 (13.2mpg): 12.2pp36, 6.6ap36

Howard Eisley's best ACTUAL stats, 2002-2003 (27.4mpg): 9.1ppg, 5.4apg

Jacque Vaughn, 1999-2000 (11.3 mpg) - 11.8 pp36, 4.9 ap36

Jacque Vaughn's best ACTUAL stats, 2001-2002 (22.6mpg): 6.6ppg, 4.3apg

I admit that I misremembered Dan Dickau's and Beno Udrih's stats, although I will say that Udrih has been more than a disappointment to Kings fans as a starter, his stats notwithstanding. But as for Eisley and Vaughn, what does it matter if they continued to average the same 36 minute stats if they never actually ended up putting up those stats on a per game basis?

You want some more examples of that? Ok. Check out Nazr Mohammed

Nazr Mohammed, 2000-2001 (15.7 mpg): 17.4pp36, 12.1rp36

Nazr Mohammed's best ACTUAL stats, 2001-2002 (26.4mpg): 9.7ppg, 7.9rpg

Others: Samaki Walker, Felipe Lopez, Obinna Ekezie, Zeljko Rebraca, Rodney White, Brian Cook, Stanislav Medvedenko. All of them put up good-to-great-to-outstanding per 36 minute numbers early in their careers. None of them ever became more than bit players. Some of them got shots at being starters and failed, others never earned a starting job at all. But the point is simple: For a significant number of players, extrapolated stats that make them look promising do not necessarily indicate that they will ever put up the extrapolated stats on a per-game basis. And if they never put them up on a per-game basis, then they aren't an indicator of things to come, are they?

[exodus]

Howard Eisley, 1996-1997 (13.2mpg): 12.2pp36, 6.6ap36

Howard Eisley's best ACTUAL stats, 2002-2003 (27.4mpg): 9.1ppg, 5.4apg

This is a case of the per minute stats matching up very well. I don't even know what you are trying to show here.

In 2003 his per 36 are 11.88 and 7.2. Just because he didn't play a full 36 minutes doesn't mean the per minute stats aren't reliable.

Look at it this way. His per 27 minute stats for 96/97 are 9.2 pts, 4.86 assists. They match up very well with his actual production in 02/03.

And it should go without saying that no stat can be fully reliable when injuries are involved.

Edited November 10, 2009 by exodus

[AHF]

This should be simple.

Per minute stats accurately predict per minute production when players are given larger roles. (Not perfect but nothing is).

Why in the world would anyone complain about per36 stats not matching up with per game stats when players aren't playing 36 minutes per game?

I can't imagine why someone would say:

Joe Schmoe averaged per minute production of 10 X while playing 10 minutes per game last year.

This year I expect Joe Schmoe will average 36 X if his playing time increases to 25 minutes per game even though consistent productivity would indicate that he would average 25 X.

Why would you expect someone's per minute productivity to vary when their minutes are increased? All the per minute productivity is supposed to tell you is what productivity you can reasonably expect to get out of those additional minutes based on consistent performance from the player on a per minute basis.

If someone produces 1 X per minute, they won't go from 10 X with 10mpg to 36 X with 25 mpg unless something else changes. The per minute productivity should tell you that with 36 minutes the player will average about 36 X, that with 25 mpg he will average about 25 X, etc.

I think we are on two totally different pages for what someone should expect from per minute stats.

Edited November 10, 2009 by AHF

[niremetal]

This should be simple.

Per minute stats accurate predict per minute production when players are given larger roles.

Why in the world would anyone complain about per36 stats not matching up with per game stats when players aren't playing 36 minutes per game?

To turn that question right back around, why in the world would anyone care about their per36 minute stats if they never get good enough to earn 36 minutes per game? If they never end up being good enough to earn a larger role, what exactly did their earlier extrapolated stats show?

Edited November 10, 2009 by niremetal

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Per minute stats have been proven to be a very reliable indicator. Zaza is a perfect example. Look at his per minute stats with the Bucks and then compare them as a starter here. There are plenty of examples which have shown time and again it is a reliable indicator assuming a legit sample size.

What about this guy in Boston?

PER 36:

15.3 ppg - 11.4 reb

Actual stats:

6.9 ppg - 5.1 reb ( 16 min/gm )

He's on his way out of the league though.