Vaughn fits well as Spurs' mentor

No matter what you think of me, I did come across some numbers that I think are fascinating. Just look at this and tell me if you think it's all completely insignificant.

These are his '05-06 numbers
Minutes 2711 1242 68%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.6 104.4 +6.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 99.8 101.9 -2.1
Net Points per 100 Possessions +10.7 +2.5 +8.3

Now this is the '06-07 Season...

Minutes 1898 1049 64%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.4 110.4 -0.0
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 101.2 100.8 +0.4
Net Points per 100 Possessions +9.1 +9.6 -0.4


Last year Tony was a big difference maker for us. Our offense was significantly better with him and the defense was improved as well. His net +8.3 per 100 possessions led the team (Manu was next closest as 7.6, Tim was 5.0).

Now consider this year's data. The scoring doesn't drop off one iota when he's not on the floor and the defense is even a tiny bit better. Essentially it really hasn't mattered if Tony has played or not, we're getting the same results. His net -0.4 per 100 possessions is 7th on the club behind Tim (12.6), Manu (10.9), Bruce (7.3), Jacque (5.0), Robert (2.0), and Frankie (+0.3).

I can't make anyone here think these numbers mean anything. Maybe they're all a complete fluke. But they tell me two things: 1) Tony's teammates are playing way better 2) He's playing a bit worse.

Aaron...Pop routinely describes Tony as a "stud".

Also, your take isn't exactly cutting edge with regards to Parker's assists...it's been argued about for years.

Go talk to IceColdBrewski sometime.

It's not that people are getting defensive, it's that your take is one that gets destroyed annually....


Check some of the older threads...you are not the first to make this claim.

tp had to do more last year because td and manu were hurt alot
he is having a better year this year even though his stats do not say that much

his outside shot is much better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aaronstampler

No matter what you think of me, I did come across some numbers that I think are fascinating. Just look at this and tell me if you think it's all completely insignificant.

These are his '05-06 numbers
Minutes 2711 1242 68%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.6 104.4 +6.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 99.8 101.9 -2.1
Net Points per 100 Possessions +10.7 +2.5 +8.3

Now this is the '06-07 Season...

Minutes 1898 1049 64%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.4 110.4 -0.0
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 101.2 100.8 +0.4
Net Points per 100 Possessions +9.1 +9.6 -0.4


Last year Tony was a big difference maker for us. Our offense was significantly better with him and the defense was improved as well. His net +8.3 per 100 possessions led the team (Manu was next closest as 7.6, Tim was 5.0).

Now consider this year's data. The scoring doesn't drop off one iota when he's not on the floor and the defense is even a tiny bit better. Essentially it really hasn't mattered if Tony has played or not, we're getting the same results. His net -0.4 per 100 possessions is 7th on the club behind Tim (12.6), Manu (10.9), Bruce (7.3), Jacque (5.0), Robert (2.0), and Frankie (+0.3).

I can't make anyone here think these numbers mean anything. Maybe they're all a complete fluke. But they tell me two things: 1) Tony's teammates are playing way better 2) He's playing a bit worse.

---

And so obviously, by extension, this means he will be equally as worthless in the playoffs. :depressed

Quote:

---

Essentially it really hasn't mattered if Tony has played or not

---

:lol

Tony makes no difference for this team whatsoever now? You're simply an idiot.

Chump, why are you listed as a Hawks fan? Did you lose a bet?

Someone's gotta be one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Someone's gotta be one.

---

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aaronstampler

No matter what you think of me, I did come across some numbers that I think are fascinating. Just look at this and tell me if you think it's all completely insignificant.

These are his '05-06 numbers
Minutes 2711 1242 68%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.6 104.4 +6.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 99.8 101.9 -2.1
Net Points per 100 Possessions +10.7 +2.5 +8.3

Now this is the '06-07 Season...

Minutes 1898 1049 64%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.4 110.4 -0.0
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 101.2 100.8 +0.4
Net Points per 100 Possessions +9.1 +9.6 -0.4


Last year Tony was a big difference maker for us. Our offense was significantly better with him and the defense was improved as well. His net +8.3 per 100 possessions led the team (Manu was next closest as 7.6, Tim was 5.0).

Now consider this year's data. The scoring doesn't drop off one iota when he's not on the floor and the defense is even a tiny bit better. Essentially it really hasn't mattered if Tony has played or not, we're getting the same results. His net -0.4 per 100 possessions is 7th on the club behind Tim (12.6), Manu (10.9), Bruce (7.3), Jacque (5.0), Robert (2.0), and Frankie (+0.3).

I can't make anyone here think these numbers mean anything. Maybe they're all a complete fluke. But they tell me two things: 1) Tony's teammates are playing way better 2) He's playing a bit worse.

---

Hmmm.....maybe it is because he more last because NVE was his backup mainly and did practically nothing. Along with Beno. This year Vaughn has been a serviceable backup and Beno has played better of late. Plus the reason Tim was so low last year was because he was hurt or do you selectively omit that part of it to try to improve your argument?

Were did you get those numbers? Do you have a link to the site?

82games.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

:lol

Tony makes no difference for this team whatsoever now? You're simply an idiot.

---

I got hard data, you have name calling. Welcome to American discourse in 2007

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aaronstampler

I got hard data, you have name calling. Welcome to American discourse in 2007

---

Chump is right, you can throw statistical data around all you want but ultimately your work is an inexplicable phenomena... if you are asserting that this team would be better or no different without tony then 1) you don't watch many Spurs games or 2) you posses no common sense whatsoever... where pray tell, would the Spurs find a replacement for Tony's 19 ppg and 5.5 apg?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aaronstampler

I got hard data, you have name calling. Welcome to American discourse in 2007

---

"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Number jockeys are horrible coaches, and this is an example why. You simply don't understand the game, because you think the numbers are the paragon of reason in sports. You choose to see the flaws in Parker's numbers rather than his improvement with his jumper and his decreased need to dominate the possession during our offensive sets, which we needed last year. You probably (if old enough) were one of the few people calling out Scottie Pippen for being less effective when Jordan came out of retirement. Cause we all know Pippen sucked after MJs return. :lol

Parker's numbers are slightly down. Congratulations on "proving" that. The sad fact is that every other Spurs fan is trying to get you to understand why, and you continually bury your head in the sand and mutter, "But his numbers are down, so he's playing worse this year!"

People aren't calling you names because you're listing stats. they're slinging mud at you because that's the extent of your repertoire. Explanations have been offered to you, and you choose to shake your head and point at the stats and continually mutter about how he's declining in effectiveness. You don't listen to anyone except a box score, and it's annoying people for wasting our time when you only want to trumpet your ability to copy-paste numbers from nbastatistics.com.

Well, guess what. Spurs fans only look at one stat. For the past twelve games, it's been all in the first column and nothing in the second.

You probably (if old enough) were one of the few people calling out Scottie Pippen for being less effective when Jordan came out of retirement. Cause we all know Pippen sucked after MJs return. <<

See there's that word again. Sucked. I have not once used a word like that in this entire thread. You people are the one who throw out black/white words like best, worst, love, hate and sucks. I haven't done that. I've pointed out numerous times that I think Tony is playing well generally and that I had no problem with his All-Star selection. What is your issue here?

Secondly I find it disengunuous for you to suggest that the reason for Tony's numbers dropping is because his teammates are carrying more of the load. Not only is Tony's averaging more FG attempts this year than last (ooh sorry, I used a statistic again) but as one of your cohorts pointed out several Spurs like Horry, Finley and Bruce have shot rather poorly this year.

The fact of the matter is Tony is using more possessions this year than ever. He's just not as efficient with those possessions as he has been in the past. The major reason why is he's not getting to the line enough and since he doesn't shoot many threes, his improved FT% hasn't compensated enough. It's great that he's improved his jumper a little, but at the end of the day it's still a 2 point field goal and not nearly as likely to be successful as a lay-up attempt. And lay-up attempts get you to the foul line. Trust me, it doesn't upset any coach in the league when Tony is casting up 18 footers, regardless of if they're falling or not.

if you are asserting that this team would be better or no different without tony then 1) you don't watch many Spurs games or 2) you posses no common sense whatsoever... where pray tell, would the Spurs find a replacement for Tony's 19 ppg and 5.5 apg?>>

I find it ironic that you can throw out such an obtuse statement and accuse me of being the one without common sense. Whenever any player from any sport misses a game it's not like they're replaced by thin air. When Yao got hurt for the Rockets it's not like they played 4 on 5 for 30 games and automatically sacrificed 25 points and 12 rebounds. Sports don't work that way. It's up to the next man down the ladder to step up. Tony's shot attempts don't magically go *poof!* when he's gone. They just because shot attempts for someone else. And I'm pretty certain that our offense didn't get 19 points or 5.5 assists worse in his absence. Actually we've scored 98.3 a game in the three games he's missed, so I think that's pretty good. I'm not saying Tony won't be a difference maker or a critical player for this team's success in the playoffs. I'm just saying he hasn't been thus far and it seems that a large portion of this board is overrating him, perhaps as a backlash for all the Manu worship (guilty as charged there).

Well, guess what. Spurs fans only look at one stat. For the past twelve games, it's been all in the first column and nothing in the second.<<

Finally, your implication that I can't be a Spurs fan because I look at the game differently than you is pretty offensive. I wasn't aware that there was some kind of application form I had to fill out telling me what the rules are to being a Spurs fan. You've got some people on this board who want Ron Artest on the team and as far as I know, they're allowed to be Spurs fans. Everyone's different. Every game the Spurs play I root for them to win, and I'm pretty sure that's the extent of all I need to do to qualify as a Spurs fan.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying Tony won't be a difference maker or a critical player for this team's success in the playoffs.

---

No, you just say he makes no difference now.

so far, not so much, no. Especially during this winning streak. I'm telling you, his best month was December.

But he made no difference then either according to you, so what does that matter?

People should learn to read stats :

1) Parker best statiscal year is this year not last year. His FG% is maybe 3% lower and he averages something like 1% less points and assists per minutes but in the same time he average 0.5 less turnover per game and it overtakes all other stats. His PER (who is the most accurate stat) has raised from 22.3 to 22.5.

2) Comparing +/- stats when Parker is on the court and of the court is quite stupid because when Parker isn't on the court, it's either when Spurs played against the opposite second team or it's during garbage time. If people aren't sold about that : last year Spurs have allowed 101.3pts/100poss with Bowen on the court (98.6 when he was off the court), Spurs have allowed 97.9 pts/100 poss when Barry was on the court ( 101.7 when he was off the court). So Barry is a better defender than Bowen.

Since people are throwing around numbers: where is the evidence that PER is the "most accurate stat"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aaronstampler

No matter what you think of me, I did come across some numbers that I think are fascinating. Just look at this and tell me if you think it's all completely insignificant.

These are his '05-06 numbers
Minutes 2711 1242 68%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.6 104.4 +6.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 99.8 101.9 -2.1
Net Points per 100 Possessions +10.7 +2.5 +8.3

Now this is the '06-07 Season...

Minutes 1898 1049 64%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.4 110.4 -0.0
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 101.2 100.8 +0.4
Net Points per 100 Possessions +9.1 +9.6 -0.4


Last year Tony was a big difference maker for us. Our offense was significantly better with him and the defense was improved as well. His net +8.3 per 100 possessions led the team (Manu was next closest as 7.6, Tim was 5.0).

Now consider this year's data. The scoring doesn't drop off one iota when he's not on the floor and the defense is even a tiny bit better. Essentially it really hasn't mattered if Tony has played or not, we're getting the same results. His net -0.4 per 100 possessions is 7th on the club behind Tim (12.6), Manu (10.9), Bruce (7.3), Jacque (5.0), Robert (2.0), and Frankie (+0.3).

I can't make anyone here think these numbers mean anything. Maybe they're all a complete fluke. But they tell me two things: 1) Tony's teammates are playing way better 2) He's playing a bit worse.

---

according to 82games.com Ely has a +33.9...maybe he should start instead of Tim if you want to go by stats alone. :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

People should learn to read stats :

1) Parker best statiscal year is this year not last year. His FG% is maybe 3% lower and he averages something like 1% less points and assists per minutes but in the same time he average 0.5 less turnover per game and it overtakes all other stats. His PER (who is the most accurate stat) has raised from 22.3 to 22.5.

2) Comparing +/- stats when Parker is on the court and of the court is quite stupid because when Parker isn't on the court, it's either when Spurs played against the opposite second team or it's during garbage time. If people aren't sold about that : last year Spurs have allowed 101.3pts/100poss with Bowen on the court (98.6 when he was off the court), Spurs have allowed 97.9 pts/100 poss when Barry was on the court ( 101.7 when he was off the court). So Barry is a better defender than Bowen.

---

Your numbers are ridiculously inaccurate. I'm looking at the numbers right now. Last year they allowed 105.8 per 100 possessions with Brent on the floor and 97.4 when he was off. With Bruce they allowed 98.1 per 100 possessions when he was on, 106.3 when he was off. Thus, Bruce was, pretty safely, a better defender than Brent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Since people are throwing around numbers: where is the evidence that PER is the "most accurate stat"?

---

I'm looking at Hollinger's PER numbers and he's got Parker doing better last year. 20.89 last year, 20.72 this year. In fact, Tony is doing worse than Hollinger's projection for him because quite reasonably he was expecting Tony to improve this year, not get worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cherylsteele

according to 82games.com Ely has a +33.9...maybe he should start instead of Tim if you want to go by stats alone. :rolleyes

---

Small sample sizes much?...

doofus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

But he made no difference then either according to you, so what does that matter?

---

As I've said many times, Tony played quite fabulously in December. How many times do I have to repeat myself? If Tony played like that every month he'd be our best player.

But for the year, if you ask "any NBA coach," they'll say it doesn't matter if Parker is on the court or not, right?