Will we resign Carter?

[Cwell]

9 minutes ago, AHF said:

The advanced stats generally mean more than volume stats.  Efficiency combined with volume and defense results in high scores in advanced stats.  Taking a ton of shots to score points helps your box score numbers but not your advanced numbers because that actually doesn't help win games.  Front offices and teams are much smarter about these things today.

those stats aren't concrete though. either you made the shot or you didn't. Either you turned it over or you didn't. You can find any random statistic nowadays to spin a narrative to support an argument. That's the equivalent of when Reggie Bush came into the league, and stunk as a running back, so they started listing all purpose yards to make him look better. Front offices aren't WINNING, so no they aren't smarter. The ones that know BASKETBALL are the ones winning.

If all these random stats proved anything why are there still so many draft busts? and why are so many guys that were overlooked turning into stars? Why are there so many bad contracts tied to horrible players? All these stat watchers are perennial losers. Anything can happen on that court on any night and no stat can predict that

Edited June 25, 2019 by Cwell

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

I don't think Vince played a significant role last season.  He was 11th on the team in MPG.  Did a fine job in that small role.

He played more minutes than Spellman.  O.K. You got me man.  You just love to do this.  I know that you know the true but for some reason act like like you don't understand.  Oh Well

[Peoriabird]

And the funny part of this is that Spellman was more efficient than Vince but yet the coach favored to Vince

[Cwell]

I bet advanced stats said Derrick Rose was gonna make Jeff Teague his B**** in that playoff series lol

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

He played more minutes than Spellman.  O.K. You got me man.  You just love to do this.  I know that you know the true but for some reason act like like you don't understand.  Oh Well

Spellman didn't have a significant role last season. He had a couple stretches where he had a more significant role and stretches where he was totally MIA.  Not in the key rotation which for most teams is 7-8 players.  Both were "just a guy" type of players filling minutes last year, IMO.  

Young

Huerter

Reddish

Hunter

Collins

Len

That is my list of guys I expect to have big roles next year.  The rest of the team will be dividing up the remaining minutes.  I hope some guys like Spellman really step up and become part of that key core of rotation players but they aren't starting the year in that inner circle.

[nathan2331]

5 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

And the funny part of this is that Spellman was more efficient than Vince but yet the coach favored to Vince

More like Spellman was unavailable at times. Carter being on the roster wouldn't block anyone who deserves the minutes.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, nathan2331 said:

 Carter being on the roster wouldn't block anyone who deserves the minutes.

Except the guy that would have made the squad over Vince.  LOL!

[AHF]

11 minutes ago, Cwell said:

those stats aren't concrete though. either you made the shot or you didn't. Either you turned it over or you didn't. You can find any random statistic nowadays to spin a narrative to support an argument. That's the equivalent of when Reggie Bush came into the league, and stunk as a running back, so they started listing all purpose yards to make him look better. Front offices aren't WINNING, so no they aren't smarter. The ones that know BASKETBALL are the ones winning.

If all these random stats proved anything why are there still so many draft busts? and why are so many guys that were overlooked turning into stars? Why are there so many bad contracts tied to horrible players? All these stat watchers are perennial losers. Anything can happen on that court on any night and no stat can predict that

1) Find me the random stat that shows that Evan Turner is a good jump shooter, that Jose Calderon was a good rim defender, or that Pete Maravich did a good job protecting the ball.  I'll wait.  (You won't find them because the advanced evaluations of these players don't change the fact that Turner can't shoot a jumper, Calderon can't block a shot, and Maravich turned the ball over almost as much as he dished out assists).  The advanced stats process these basic numbers and give them context, often valuing the results against league average performance which gives you a better understanding of who is really performing and who is just the minutes.  Think of DMC who put up almost the exact same performance in Utah as in Atlanta but got a ton more minutes.  Box score numbers went through the roof and while he improved a little he was mostly the same player.  Since he was doing almost the exact same things just over more minutes you see rate based advanced stats holding steady (with improvement baked in only because of actual changes in skill like the improvements he made to shooting %s).

 

2) Regarding the draft, you can find data on how predictive numbers are from college to the NBA.  The scouting didn't improve by relying on points per game like it used to over looking at something like PER that factored in how efficiently you scored those points.  The more advanced stats have been gaining traction precisely because they are more predictive than simple box score numbers.  There has never been and almost assuredly never will be any tool that perfectly predicts future performance.  Too many variables, including ones that can't be measured either by the eye test or by any stat.  Busts will always be there.  GMs have less time to scout players today than they did in the past which hurts and some better tools to evaluate their performance which helps.  It doesn't net out to perfection and nobody should be claiming it does.

 

3) The idea that these stats are "random" suggests you haven't looked into how the stats are generated.  A stat like PER (which I'm mentioning because the formula is public) is based on whether you make the shot or didn't.  A stat like points is only based on the shots you make and ignores the shots you miss.  So shoot 10-30 for 24 points and that is the same as shooting 10-12 for 24 points if you are looking to points.  PER, however, punishes a player for shooting like Evan Turner and rewards a player f

[nathan2331]

4 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Except the guy that would have made the squad over Vince.  LOL!

And what would that guy do besides sit on the bench for most of the time? If you don't think Vince's mentorship means anything then fine, I can understand why you wouldn't support resigning him. But to me having him on the roster is worth more than having Jaylen Adams or Daniel Hamilton whose minutes he hypothetically would've been blocking last year. Now, if they were players I thought had more potential, like Isaac Bonga and Mo Wagner from the Lakers, then maybe I could agree with you. And even i that situation if we needed roster spots to bring in those two I'd rather waive Adams, or buyout Hill and Plumlee.

[AHF]

15 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Except the guy that would have made the squad over Vince.  LOL!

If there is a guy that Schlenk and Pierce think has a future with us and who they want to feed minutes then by all means sign them!  It will be Schlenk and Pierce who decide.  I hope Schlenk does find some underlooked gem who blooms into a star with us.  If he can find a Ben Wallace then that is much better than having Vince (or Hill, Plumlee...).  If we are just adding another body to the roster who has no future with us like Turner, Crabbe, Plumlee, Hill...then I'd rather have Carter. 

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, nathan2331 said:

And what would that guy do besides sit on the bench for most of the time? If you don't think Vince's mentorship means anything then fine, I can understand why you wouldn't support resigning him. But to me having him on the roster is worth more than having Jaylen Adams or Daniel Hamilton whose minutes he hypothetically would've been blocking last year. Now, if they were players I thought had more potential, like Isaac Bonga and Mo Wagner from the Lakers, then maybe I could agree with you. And even i that situation if we needed roster spots to bring in those two I'd rather waive Adams, or buyout Hill and Plumlee.

That wasn't the case with Poythress last year

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

That wasn't the case with Poythress last year

He played when the people in front of him were hurt but mostly didn't play at all.

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

If there is a guy that Schlenk and Pierce think has a future with us and who they want to feed minutes then by all means sign them!  It will be Schlenk and Pierce who decide.  I hope Schlenk does find some underlooked gem who blooms into a star with us.  If he can find a Ben Wallace then that is much better than having Vince (or Plumlee, Crabbe....).  If we are just adding another body to the roster who has no future with us like Turner, Crabbe, Plumlee, Hill...then I'd rather have Carter. 

So it has to be some unknown future all star and not an average NBA player?  We will just have to agree to disagree cause Dedmon and Len were those average NBA players last year and I would rather have those guys over Vince any day of the week. But that's just me

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So it has to be some unknown future all star and not an average NBA player?  We will just have to agree to disagree cause Dedmon and Len were those average NBA players last year and I would rather have those guys over Vince any day of the week. But that's just me

If it is someone who has a real potential to be a future contributor, then I'm on board.  I'm also on board cutting Plumlee, Hill, Crabbe or Turner for such a player.  We already have a group of players with no future, though.  So that suggests that Schlenk may not be opposed to having them.  If he didn't, he could just waive Hill and sign someone else.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

  If he didn't, he could just waive Hill and sign someone else.

Or not resign Vince Which would save money

[AHF]

1 minute ago, Peoriabird said:

Or not resign Vince Which would save money

Vince is not going to cost much money.  We'll be well below average payroll.  But if the Hawks want to pinch pennies then they will.  It is up to Schlenk.

[IheartVolt]

1 hour ago, Peoriabird said:

Lord have mercy...I am just simply rebutting the argument that Lin or Vince needed to be on the team in order for a young player flourish.  Clearly Young didn't regress after Lin left...In fact his numbers got better.  Therefore that theory was at least debunked by Trae last year

Ummm.. I see what you are going for but Trae is a skilled, talented, budding star, not everyone is gifted like Trae Young. Oh and Trae benefited a great deal from VC last year as well so it's a bit of a bad example. 

 

[IheartVolt]

I hope Vince returns next year and then decides or is offered an assistance position.. Everyone benefits from his leadership

[Peoriabird]

13 minutes ago, IheartVolt said:

Ummm.. I see what you are going for but Trae is a skilled, talented, budding star, not everyone is gifted like Trae Young. Oh and Trae benefited a great deal from VC last year as well so it's a bit of a bad example. 

 

So is Cam and Hunter so you're making my point.  Those kind of guys don't need Vince and i agree

[JayBirdHawk]

I'd rather have Vince than Turner, Crabbe, Plumlee and Hill.