Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Wow.  With this kind of performance he'll be an all star one day.  🤷‍♂️

I, Myself would have thought Stockton or Kidd would have done it.   

Posted Images

  • Admin
25 minutes ago, Diesel said:

 

I, Myself would have thought Stockton or Kidd would have done it. 

 

Neither Stockton or Kidd were big scorers as they were spending that time playing defense 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, capstone21 said:

Neither Stockton or Kidd were big scorers as they were spending that time playing defense 

Fair.

No Iverson, Curry (assists), CP3 , Steve Nash, etc.. either

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

First time I saw Trae live was against the Spurs, at GT pavilion his rookie year, when he hit the logo dagger 3 to win the game.

I knew then we had us something special.

 

It's funny looking at that game now.  LP was damn near freaking out at the end, wanting Trae to go to the basket.  Meanwhile, Trae was sizing up the situation all along.

And when he made the shot, LP was almost in disbelief that he (1) didn't use the pick and roll . . (2) took a 35 footer . . and (3) made the shot.  The only person not surprised that it went in, was Vince Carter.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
14 hours ago, bleachkit said:

Since when is 40/35 anything special? That's below league average. Only thing high is the free throw %. Nice cherry picked statistical anomaly.

in a sense, this makes the stats less cherry picked.  Often you will see cherry picked stats that have a high stat that few people will meet like some of the stats like that round Josh Smith where his combination of high bpg and spg cut out the vast, vast majority of players.  The 40/35 is a pretty low bar that would only exclude guys like Allen Iverson who shot objectively poorly while putting up huge counting stats.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AHF said:

in a sense, this makes the stats less cherry picked.  Often you will see cherry picked stats that have a high stat that few people will meet like some of the stats like that round Josh Smith where his combination of high bpg and spg cut out the vast, vast majority of players.  The 40/35 is a pretty low bar that would only exclude guys like Allen Iverson who shot objectively poorly while putting up huge counting stats.

Remove the free throw percentage and redo it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
23 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Remove the free throw percentage and redo it. 

The free throw % is the only one of those other than points and assists that seriously separates players.  I'm saying the 40/35 is actually unusually leniant and the only one tied to Trae's numbers tightly (he sits at 87.7%).  They could have done something like 42.5%/37%/87% and made it more arbitrary and excluded many more players who shot like 36% from 3pt range or something.  This isn't the worst example I've seen of this type of number slicing.

In fact, I'm not seeing much difference removing the ft%.

There have only been 20 seasons in nba history with a player averaging 25 ppg and 9 apg.  Once you add in 3pt% (and no ft% and no fg%) at 35% you are already down to 4 seasons.  Add 3pt% at 37% and you are down to 2 seasons in NBA history.  

These additional filters get you down to a single person but just 25 and 9 takes you to a list of about 10 people (since many of those 20 total seasons are repeats with James Harden, Oscar Robertson, etc.)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AHF said:

The free throw % is the only one of those other than points and assists that seriously separates players.  I'm saying the 40/35 is actually unusually leniant and the only one tied to Trae's numbers tightly (he sits at 87.7%).  They could have done something like 42.5%/37%/87% and made it more arbitrary and excluded many more players who shot like 36% from 3pt range or something.  This isn't the worst example I've seen of this type of number slicing.

In fact, I'm not seeing much difference removing the ft%.

There have only been 20 seasons in nba history with a player averaging 25 ppg and 9 apg.  Once you add in 3pt% (and no ft% and no fg%) at 35% you are already down to 4 seasons.  Add 3pt% at 37% and you are down to 2 seasons in NBA history.  

These additional filters get you down to a single person but just 25 and 9 takes you to a list of about 10 people (since many of those 20 total seasons are repeats with James Harden, Oscar Robertson, etc.)

What are the 25 and 9 seasons? I'm curious

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still absurd to me that Trae was the only player at all star voting with points>25 and assists>9.    Harden has since joined him.   Just baffling you could exclude this guy from the game with those basic numbers.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
12 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

What are the 25 and 9 seasons? I'm curious

Looks like I may be wrong about the total number of seasons as it appears that in addition to hiding the top 10 seasons, basketball reference also now cuts off the total at 20:

image.png

That would not apply to others with only 2 and 4 responsive seasons.  There just could be more than 20 for a simple 25 & 9.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AHF said:

Looks like I may be wrong about the total number of seasons as it appears that in addition to hiding the top 10 seasons, basketball reference also now cuts off the total at 20:

image.png

That would not apply to others with only 2 and 4 responsive seasons.  There just could be more than 20 for a simple 25 & 9.

Why does it not show all the seasons? Basketball reference is very annoying, I wish there was better alternative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
4 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Why does it not show all the seasons? Basketball reference is very annoying, I wish there was better alternative.

It used to but now they have gated it for paying customers.  $8/month is too rich for my blood for how I would use that access recreationally which is a shame because it was a great tool until they put it behind a pay wall.

When you get to fewer than 20 responsive seasons, they show you the precise number of seasons but not the top 10.

Example:

25 and 9 with a 75% ft%:

image.png

25 and 9 with an 87% ft%:

image.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.