Reply With Quote
Been married for 35 years.... I can't even remember everything I 'incorporated', but whatever it was, it seems to be working..Have you guys been able to inculcate this into your romantic relationships also?
Me, I like to rape em! Only book I've ever read is Trump's Art of the Deal!
Been married for 35 years.... I can't even remember everything I 'incorporated', but whatever it was, it seems to be working..Have you guys been able to inculcate this into your romantic relationships also?
My condolences...
43 years here…next weekend my parents celebrate their 66th anniversary. When we celebrated our 40th my Dad told me “Nice start”.
Very nice...
The thing with Jones is, if the Spurs are acquiring a small guard that's a star (Young) or top starter (Garland) . . .
1) He'd be relegated to strictly backing them up, a role he's outgrown
2) As a '25 free agent and considering the rising cost and diminished role, why would him or the Spurs want to invest in one another long term?
3) The opposing team could have interest as he'd represent quality backfill as a third guard.
I've been married 30 years....to two different women!
It’s perfectly fine if Tre and the spurs go their separate ways after his deal expires next summer in my view, but I also take the point that his value is probably at its highest this summer.
Tre tops out as a backup on a good team, so I wonder what his market will be in 2025. Could be the spurs are able to keep him in that backup role beyond this deal, but it’s also no accident it was a short term deal. What we DONT want is to have the PG position still an open question by then, with the spurs feeling they have to overpay to keep Tre.
Meh the Kawhi deal extracted every last ounce from the Spurs while they couldn't even pry Anunoby out of Masai and the Raptors ended up with the two best players in the trade. I hope they don't take it easy on any team they have bent over a barrel the same way Toronto went in with no vaseline in 2018.
I'm not a huge fan of DDR but I think he was a better player than Green as far as an asset, right?
I forgot about this discussion, and just noticed it again.
Your use of the decimal point makes no sense, because points scored is a whole number. A basket is not worth .002 points, it’s 2. I’ll correct that. It’s your factor X that needs the decimal point, for this to make sense. (Speaking of somebody’s math being wrong. It’s “probable” a player will score 0.114 points?? That doesn’t look probable to me.)
So, let’s take a look. The first thing is, you introduced X without any attempt to evaluate it. You assume X is less than .781 but you make no attempt to show that. You don’t know how, perhaps.
Markkanen has a turnover rate, TOV%, of 7.1 (which is quite low.) That includes not only bad passes, but times when he dribbles off his foot, etc.
But say it’s all bad passes. For what we’re doing here, we can round that number and call it .07. (Changed from % to simply a decimal number.)
1.00-.07=.93. And .93 is higher than .781. Not lower.
You assumed (without checking) X had to be less than .781 but it isn’t. It’s higher.
The pass to Wemby is still the correct move.
Then, how much worse would Markkanen’s TOV% have to become, in attempted passes to Wemby, to make the pass the wrong move? Still taking the entire TOV% to be bad passes, which we know is not really the case.
1.00 - .78 = .22. As we know, 22 is more than three times 7. He’d have to become more than three times as bad at passing to Wemby, compared to his normal turnover rate. Pretty dubious.
The problem with Markkanen, as a prospective teammate for Wemby, isn’t that he’s a bad passer. It’s that he isn’t inclined to pass at all, when he gets a look at the basket, himself.
Big picture, what players might we trade? Seems like Keldon only. Not sure if teams want Zollins, nor we move on with no other center who the FO trust, despite his challenges this year. Of course we have draft picks but keeping them seems part of the long-term plan. Basically, curious to see if they make any moves. It feels they have to get 1-2 veterans.
Just because they haven’t traded draft picks yet doesn’t mean it’s not part of the plan. In fact I’d be surprised if it isn’t part of the plan. The Spurs just have too many draft picks to even think about keeping them all. Being patient is not the same as not having a plan to use the picks.
To clarify I was thinking this Summer. I imagine they hold on to draft picks, waiting for a suitable star to force a trade, which has an uncertain time frame.
We all want the splashy trade for a PG, but I think it’s more likely that they bring in a few vets to upgrade at:
1. Starting SF: Thobias, Hayward?
2. Back up SF/PF: Batum?
3. PG: Monte Morris?
And then they draft the best SF they can and develop that guy. I’m kinda resigned to idea that we won’t get the TOR pick this year, which is fine by me.
Goal next year: Play-in; preserve chance at maximum number of lotto picks, even if they’re later in the draft.
If the question is 'might trade', i think Wembanyama is the only untouchable. Devin and Sochan probably won't be brought into discussion by our side and everyone else is going to be in various discussions with other teams.
I will admit, I typo'ed. That should be 1.14 not .114.
With that said, your logic is wrong. The inverse (1-TOV%) of Markkannen's TOV% is not an appropriate estimate of P(successful pass, M to W).
TOV% adds up several different kinds of turnovers. 1) Where he loses control of ball when dribbling (or gets the ball stolen). 2) Where he commits a offensive foul or other rules infraction (eg stepping out of bounds) and 3) When he makes a bad pass that is intercepted...
3) is the fraction of passes that Markannen thinks are best option available to him (ie choosing that particular pass instead of shooting, dribbling, or making a different pass), that he then fails to complete.
Markkannen has that nice low TOV% because most the time, when he has the ball in his hands, he's either shooting, or has 2 steps to the rim (and thus doesn't dribble); as you admit, he isn't inclined to pass. There's a reason he doesn't make a bunch of passes. Part of that low inclination to pass is his own assessment of how likely he is to make a successful pass (that is more valuable than him doing something else: shooting, mostly). Most of the passes he attempts are pretty simple - giving it to his PG after securing a rebound (while the other team is running back to defend). He doesn't throw post entry passes often (or attacking passes in general; his career assist percentage is 7.4%).
The probability of how successful Markkannen would be making a notional pass to Wemby at the hoop is independent of his TOV%; because if he thinks he can't make that pass (or has a low chance of making it), whether his thinking's right or wrong, obviously he won't throw it...
Although I doubt Markkannen thinks about it in decimal notation, for him to try that pass, he has to assess that passing to Wemby will get the team more points than him shooting it. In other words, (assuming the shooting percentages as given), that P(successful pass, M to W) >= .781
Markkanen's role has also never been playmaker. If he's being passed the ball and is in a position to shoot, his role is to shoot. That is his job - to be the primary scoring option the last few years in Utah. That would obviously change in San Antonio, and I'm not too worried that he's too stubborn/stupid to pass it to Wemby if he is open under the basket.
I’ve actually never seen two people boasting about their salesmanship on a basketball forum, very odd.
Im missing your point mate…
are you saying you’d be fine with Tre being the starter next season(s)??
I’d be more than happy if I’d never see him ever again in a Spurs uniform tbh…
Hes already overpaid and a liability who can’t pass the damn ball or shoot.
If you think that's boasting or that the topic was about salesmanship for that matter, you might want to re-read things..... or not...
No, it should be 114. It’s a number of points scored. Players do not score 1.14 points. (Speaking, again, of somebody’s math being wrong.)
How can you get it so wrong, TWICE?
Pay attention. Prove you’re not hopeless.
You went astray at the start. It’s about points per 100 attempts. You failed to multiply by the 100. You treated it as if the player only shot once. And indeed, with that earlier error of .114 you were treating it as if the player only shot 1/10 of a time.
The correct calculation is:
100 (shot attempts) * .38 (success rate) * 3 (pts per success) = 114 points (on that many attempts.)
You know perfectly well that points scored by a basketball player is a whole number, not a decimal.
For pete’s sake. Get it right.
With that said, your logic is wrong. The inverse (1-TOV%) of Markkannen's TOV% is not an appropriate estimate of P(successful pass, M to W).
TOV% adds up several different kinds of turnovers. …
I mentioned that it includes all turnovers. In addition to being poor at math, do you not read well, either?
The person who introduced that inverse was not me. It was YOU. It’s in your X. It’s in how you got that number 781 that you used. (Correctly 0.781.)
You don’t realize that about what you did, I guess. I could explain it to you, but you’re convincing me not to bother. You still think a player can score something like 1.14 points.
However, Markkanen’s TOV% is, of course, appropriate to use where an overestimate of bad passes is acceptable. An overestimate is acceptable here.
Taking out turnovers which are not bad passes will give a smaller number. His number 7.1 becomes 6.1 instead, perhaps. But then, 100 - (that number) will be even higher above .781. Which means, even more strongly, that he should pass. The pass to Wemby will score more points than a Markkanen shot.
Your logic is wrong. This is not about what players think, it’s about what they do.…
3) is the fraction of passes that Markannen thinks are best option available to him …
NBA basketball is very fast paced. It’s mostly a display of trained reflexes. It offers the players little to no opportunity for contemplation.
The reason players practice so much is so that they can develop the correct reactions, in various situations, without thinking about it. If you have to pause and think about something out there, you’re probably cooked, even at a much lower level of basketball.
You have wandered into some other kind of game.
… He [Markkanen] doesn't throw post entry passes often…
A relevant observation when we’re talking about prospective teammates for Wemby. A complaint about the current team is exactly the scarcity of passes to him, even when he’s open in good position.
The probability of how successful Markkannen would be making a notional pass to Wemby at the hoop is independent of his TOV%; because…
Because Markkanen, himself, will decide when to pass to Wemby, and his judgment is so infallible he should be the Pope. You claim.
What you wrote is just silliness. It’s nice that you try, I suppose, but goodness.
Your argument is, ‘Markkanen won’t pass to Wemby unless X is greater than .781 because, uh, because, uh, he won’t want to!’
That is straight out of Droolerville High School. Or grade school.
Anyway, the known data about Markkanen, and Wemby, tells us that Markkanen would shoot even when he should pass to Wemby to score more points. Of the top fifty scorers in the league, Markkanen has the lowest assist number. He’s too much an alpha to play well with Wemby. He sure as would not be the alpha on a Wemby team. Markkanen might be retrained, but he’s 26 years old. It’s good that Markkanen can score, but we’re talking about team building, around Wemby.
He's not some amazing asset, but in hypotheticals like this, they might as well kill three birds with one stone.
Outside of scenarios like this, I doubt he's going anywhere. Part of their preference for a bigger, combo lead guard type, is likely to pave the way for him to become the 6th man going forward.
Not at all. I'm saying, with a Young, Garland, etc., his role would be diminished, all but ensuring he'd leave the following off season anyway when he's a free agent. Plus, adding him to a package for those types could slightly lessen the draft capital given up, so it makes sense all the way around to include him.
In Andy Bailey's latest monthly aggregate of players in various catch-all metrics, Jones rates 127th, in a league with 450 standard contracts and 90 two-way ones.
He is quite clearly quoting expected points per attempt. It's wild that you can go an entire post calling someone else stupid without realizing this.
There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (5 members and 12 guests)
Posting Permissions
