15 Numbers: November Edition

#226
#226
I argue with a guy in the NBA forum a lot over stats. He tried to tell me once that Russell Westbrook was like the 40th best player in the NBA and that Kyle Korver was better than him because of efficiency.
 
#227
#227
Spartacavolus said:
-bump for emphasis as to who is confused and who isn't.

-still dead ass wrong. A rebound and putback directly affects the numbers in an offensive eff rating.
Click to expand...

Tell me where the offensive rebounds go in this equation:

Total points / Total possessions = Offensive Efficiency.

Where do I plug in the O rebounds, Nate Silver?
 
#228
#228
Spartacavolus said:
Inefficient as hell. Don't care what your stat says. Attempts, made and Fg% are towards the bottom of the conference. Bto already brought up the efficiency stat, which is skewed due to our high rank in offensive rebounds, which increases the efficiency rating as those boards count as the same possession. Without those rebounds, your efficiency rating reflects the bottom of the sec offensive stats.
Click to expand...

This is what you're arguing, like a dumbass. Stop trying to back track and back peddle and simple man up and admit you'e wrong. Or not, who cares. But for god sake stop arguing and getting yourself further in the hole.
 
#229
#229
Spartacavolus said:
--A coach that wins with a lower eff rating will be happier than one that loses with a higher eff rating 10 times out of 10. You could have a good eff% and lose by double digits, or you could have a lower eff% and win by 20.
I'm simply telling you what you need to be looking at to fully discuss stats and you have proven to be incapable. You obviously have never coached a game or been in a coaches room in your life when several other coaches bring up the points I'm bringing up. Do you think I listened and learned or just make it up on the go as you do.

We had 51 pts against WSU with 3 minutes left. Obviously, according to you, we have an efficient offense, can score the ball at will and scoring the ball isn't our problem, as you say.
Anybody else here that thinks that offense isn't a problem for CM/UT needs to follow another sport.
Click to expand...

Oh brilliant argument... A coach that wins will be happier than a coach that loses.

Did you learn that one as an assistant for John Wooden or something?

Again, you're arguing such a narrow. The last 3 minutes of the Wichita game are what, 3% of UT's total season? UT lead 44-41 with 9 minutes left in the game, and let WSU rattle off 29 points in 9 minutes!!!!! The problem with anyone with eyes is the defense, dummy.

It's becoming quite obvious why you are no longer in the coaching bizz, my man. Coaches have to have a rudimentary grasp of numbers.
 
#231
#231
haha. Back peddling. Sums up the iq difference perfectly. No wonder you have no idea wtf I am talking about.

One question MC Shammer, will the eff rating increase when UT has 18 off rebounds compared to 5?
Yes or no.

Now tell me I'm wrong again about off reb affecting efficiency as you answer yes. I'm not in a hole doofus. When you answer the question above, you will have debated the opposite of where you were a few posts ago, and will be in 100% agreement with what I posted, that you highlighted above, as you asserted it was a dumbass opinion.
 
#233
#233
Spartacavolus said:
haha. Back peddling. Sums up the iq difference perfectly. No wonder you have no idea wtf I am talking about.

One question MC Shammer, will the eff rating increase when UT has 18 off rebounds compared to 5?
Yes or no.

Now tell me I'm wrong again about off reb affecting efficiency as you answer yes. I'm not in a hole doofus. When you answer the question above, you will have debated the opposite of where you were a few posts ago, and will be in 100% agreement with what I posted, that you highlighted above, as you asserted it was a dumbass opinion.
Click to expand...

"One question MC Shammer, will the eff rating increase when UT has 18 off rebounds compared to 5?
Yes or no."

We have no way to know unless we know if UT converts on any of those putbacks.


As I've told you, offensive efficiency is simply: Total Points/ Total possessions. If UT fails to convert on those extra 13 boards, then you get the same amount of points on the same amounts of possessions and the O eff. are equal.
 
#235
#235
That's like asking "Will the Off Eff rating increase if UT has 7 TOs as opposed to 15 TOs?"

You can't tell unless you know how many possessions UT converts.

Same with saying "Will the OE rating increase if UT shoots 30 foul shots as opposed to 15?"

Or "Will the OE rating increase if UT shoots 50% from the field instead of 40%?"

Are you beginning to understand what we're telling you?
 
#236
#236
Our offense depends almost entirely on 2 things, offensive rebounding and Jordy. You take one of those 2 things away and our offense is garbage. We slowly come up the court, pass it to the wing, the wing tries to feed the post. When that doesn't work we panic till 5 seconds are left and pray Jordy bails us out. Or somebody else throws up a shot and we pray Stokes or Maymon gets the rebound. We have poor spacing, no clear outs, no pick n rolls, no sort of offensive flow. If you think that is an efficient offense I don't know what to tell you.
 
#238
#238
BadJerry20 said:
Our offense depends almost entirely on 2 things, offensive rebounding and Jordy. You take one of those 2 things away and our offense is garbage. We slowly come up the court, pass it to the wing, the wing tries to feed the post. When that doesn't work we panic till 5 seconds are left and pray Jordy bails us out. Or somebody else throws up a shot and we pray Stokes or Maymon gets the rebound. We have poor spacing, no clear outs, no pick n rolls, no sort of offensive flow. If you think that is an efficient offense I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

UT's offense doesn't execute sets very well. But because of Jordy's play, offensive putbacks, getting to the foul line (UT gets 25.4% of its points off foul shots, 66th most in the nation), and because you guys don't turn the ball over, UT's offense puts up points.

Execution isn't synonymous with efficiency. That's where Sparty is getting confused.
 
#239
#239
MemphisCanes said:
"One question MC Shammer, will the eff rating increase when UT has 18 off rebounds compared to 5?
Yes or no."

We have no way to know unless we know if UT converts on any of those putbacks.


As I've told you, offensive efficiency is simply: Total Points/ Total possessions. If UT fails to convert on those extra 13 boards, then you get the same amount of points on the same amounts of possessions and the O eff. are equal.
Click to expand...

are you unable to use common sense to understand that 3x more off boards will almost inherently mean more buckets therefore increasing the pts/poss?
Are you so simple minded you can't grasp that?
 
#241
#241
MemphisCanes said:
That's like asking "Will the Off Eff rating increase if UT has 7 TOs as opposed to 15 TOs?"

You can't tell unless you know how many possessions UT converts.

Same with saying "Will the OE rating increase if UT shoots 30 foul shots as opposed to 15?"

Or "Will the OE rating increase if UT shoots 50% from the field instead of 40%?"

Are you beginning to understand what we're telling you?[/QUOTE]


it appears you are finally coming around and arguing against your initial points again. Off eff rating was the end all/be all for you a little while ago as I stated, adnauseum, that many other factors/stats must be analyzed when discussing a stat. Now, 5 pages later, you finally realize many other factors can skew the stat to render it meaningless at times when those other stats render it meaningless.
it's about time you got on board. Very proud.
Click to expand...
 
#242
#242
MemphisCanes said:
UT's offense doesn't execute sets very well. But because of Jordy's play, offensive putbacks, getting to the foul line (UT gets 25.4% of its points off foul shots, 66th most in the nation), and because you guys don't turn the ball over, UT's offense puts up points.

Execution isn't synonymous with efficiency. That's where Sparty is getting confused.
Click to expand...

So an efficient offense doesn't necessarily mean a good offense.
 
#243
#243
Spartacavolus said:
are you unable to use common sense to understand that 3x more off boards will almost inherently mean more buckets therefore increasing the pts/poss?
Are you so simple minded you can't grasp that?
Click to expand...

There's a correlation (just like the other three factors I've been trying to pound into your thick noggin for hours today), but you still have to convert baskets.

The only thing offensive efficiency measures is how much a team scores per possession. Period. End of story. The sooner you can admit that, the sooner we can move on.
 
#244
#244
OrangeAllDay said:
Lol nobody can live that down
Click to expand...

In all fairness Korver is more efficient. Of course he is only better than Russ at shooting, but that doesn't matter. Thats why I like and hate stats, they are a good gauge to start but unless you can step back and look at other factors they get a little silly.
 
#245
#245
BadJerry20 said:
So an efficient offense doesn't necessarily mean a good offense.
Click to expand...

Well, what's the point of an offense? To put the ball in the basket, correct? It doesn't necessarily matter whether you score on the first shot of a possession, or the 10th after you've grabbed 9 offensive rebounds and missed 9 shots, or whether you get fouled on an attempt and make FTs from the line. Points are points.

So an efficient offense scores points well. It may not do it in a pretty way, but it scores. Sparty is confused because he thinks that offensive rebounds shouldn't count in the determination of how well an offense is doing; like an offense that scores a lot on putbacks is somehow inferior to an offense that hits the first jump shot in a possession.
 
Last edited:
#246
#246
Spartacavolus said:
it appears you are finally coming around and arguing against your initial points again. Off eff rating was the end all/be all for you a little while ago as I stated, adnauseum, that many other factors/stats must be analyzed when discussing a stat. Now, 5 pages later, you finally realize many other factors can skew the stat to render it meaningless at times when those other stats render it meaningless.
it's about time you got on board. Very proud.
Click to expand...

That stat, along with Defensive Efficiency, are the two most meaningful stats in the game (aside from wins and losses). They are the end all, be all. They are never meaningless, unless you don't have the brainpower to undertsand them.

Every other stat out there, including offensive rebounding, is just an attempt to explain these two stats.
 
Last edited:
#247
#247
MemphisCanes said:
There's a correlation (just like the other three factors I've been trying to pound into your thick noggin for hours today), but you still have to convert baskets.

The only thing offensive efficiency measures is how much a team scores per possession. Period. End of story. The sooner you can admit that, the sooner we can move on.
Click to expand...


I know what it measures. I just don't care by itself. Being top 20 in offensive efficiency means jack **** when you are at the bottom of the conference in almost all offensive categories except offensive rebounding. When offensive reb goes away, your eff stat will go with it, unless attempts, makes and/or % goes up. That's how you are supposed to look at stats.
 
#248
#248
MemphisCanes said:
Well, what's the point of an offense? To put the ball in the basket, correct? It doesn't necessarily matter whether you score on the first shot of a possession, or the 10th after you've grabbed 9 offensive rebounds and missed 9 shots, or whether you get fouled on an attempt and make FTs from the line. Points are points.

So an efficient offense scores points well. It may not do it in a pretty way, but it scores. Sparty is confused because he thinks that offensive rebounds shouldn't count in the determination of how well an offense is doing; like an offense that scores a lot on putbacks is somehow inferior to an offense that hits the first jump shot in a possession.
Click to expand...

Well of course that's the point. My point is our efficient offense is based on the 2 things I listed, remove Jordys scoring or Stokes offensive rebounding and our offense is in big trouble, and a good team will do that to us. A good offensive team could survive one of those 2 things happening, we can't. Again an efficient offense doesn't necessarily mean a good offense.
 
#249
#249
Spartacavolus said:
I know what it measures. I just don't care by itself. Being top 20 in offensive efficiency means jack **** when you are at the bottom of the conference in almost all offensive categories except offensive rebounding. When offensive reb goes away, your eff stat will go with it, unless attempts, makes and/or % goes up. That's how you are supposed to look at stats.
Click to expand...

Well, first, that's not true. UT is first in the SEC in TO rate as well (how often they turn the ball over). They're 6th in getting to the foul line.

But you seem to count on "offensive rebounds going away". They haven't yet. Of course if something like that changes, or if UT starts turning the ball over more, or getting to the foul line less, or shooting a higher %, their efficiency will change accordinly.
 
#250
#250
BadJerry20 said:
Well of course that's the point. My point is our efficient offense is based on the 2 things I listed, remove Jordys scoring or Stokes offensive rebounding and our offense is in big trouble, and a good team will do that to us. A good offensive team could survive one of those 2 things happening, we can't. Again an efficient offense doesn't necessarily mean a good offense.
Click to expand...

Well, you can be worried about your offense if you'd like. Your defense what you need to be MORE worried about though.

Your offense is putting up points, your defense can't stop anybody.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top