NBA: Your All-NBA teams

[HarlemHeat37]

http://wagesofwins.com/2013/03/11/th...nd-shaq-rings/

[da_suns_fan]

Uh, ya, the Wages of Wins formulas you referenced in the article I clicked on involve WP48..I used WoW stats when I began using advanced stats, until I realized how flawed their numbers are, tbh..

Also, I said both elite defender and elite rebounder, like a Ben Wallace..Faried is a mediocre defender that can't create a shot for himself, there's absolutely no logical all-NBA argument for a player that can't get stops and can't create his own shot..

Sure there is: All-NBA indicates the best players at that position. Not the best players capable of getting their own shot off. And who cares if you can "get your own shot off" when it doesnt go in the basket (like both Carmelo Anthony and Russell westbrook).

[da_suns_fan]

http://wagesofwins.com/2013/03/11/th...nd-shaq-rings/

Interesting, but Im pretty sure you skimmed it and didnt actually read it.

Dude looks at playoff production and writes: The key we should all note is that the playoffs are very limited number of games. Over 20 games any NBA player can have a great run.

And youre not arguing against any of his conclusions specifically, just summing up that wages of wins cant be right because it "just cant" which is the typical lazy analysis used by most nba pundits.

[Phillip]

Nonsense.

It doesnt matter where Carmelo works out of. The fact is that he doesnt put in the basket any better than the average small forward in the league. If hes so good, why is he so AVERAGE?

Re ed argument from a re ed poster.

And if working of screens is "easier", then why doesnt he work off screens? The truth is running around screens all game is physically exhausting and he'd rather not do it because hes a lazy player.

Why didn't Steve Nash have a low post offensive game? Is it because its physically exhausting and he is lazy?

[Phillip]

Sure there is: All-NBA indicates the best players at that position. Not the best players capable of getting their own shot off. And who cares if you can "get your own shot off" when it doesnt go in the basket (like both Carmelo Anthony and Russell westbrook).

Are you suggesting that an ability to create your own shot, as well as shots for others is not a necessary quality for championship level basketball?

[da_suns_fan]

Re ed argument from a re ed poster.



Why didn't Steve Nash have a low post offensive game? Is it because its physically exhausting and he is lazy?

What point guard has a low post offensive game? It can be expected for Caremelo to play off screens if that gets more made baskets (since that is what YOU are implying). Steve Nash was phenomenal at "his game" whereas Carmelo has never been "above average" in any year of his career.

You havent explained why Carmelo is so poor at "his game". All you can do is make excuses that guys like Durant, Lebron, Harden etc dont have to make.

[da_suns_fan]

Are you suggesting that an ability to create your own shot, as well as shots for others is not a necessary quality for championship level basketball?

Im saying that Carmelo's ability to create his own shot doesnt result in made baskets (see his average field goal percentages and points-per-shot ratings) and certainly doesnt get good shots for others (see his negative assist to turnover ratio).

[Phillip]

What point guard has a low post offensive game? It can be expected for Caremelo to play off screens if that gets more made baskets (since that is what YOU are implying). Steve Nash was phenomenal at "his game" whereas Carmelo has never been "above average" in any year of his career.

You havent explained why Carmelo is so poor at "his game". All you can do is make excuses that guys like Durant, Lebron, Harden etc dont have to make.

WTF? I'd say a year shooting +49% FG, +35% 3PT, 25.7 ppg/7.4 rpg/3.4 apg is a ridiculously impressive season for anyone. Yet, according to you, that is not "above average"?

Im saying that Carmelo's ability to create his own shot doesnt result in made baskets (see his average field goal percentages and points-per-shot ratings) and certainly doesnt get good shots for others (see his negative assist to turnover ratio).

Looks to me like he has plenty of made baskets, considering he averages 25ppg for his career and has done so shooting above 45% for his career.

I don't diagree that he has efficiency issues at times with his scoring, due to poor shot selection, but it doesn't change the fact that defenses have to respect the out of his scoring ability, and it certainly helps his teams play winning basketball. IIRC, his team has never not made the playoffs since he has been in the league. I'd say that's pretty impressive, and his abilities to score contribute to wins more than you want to admit.

[HarlemHeat37]

My argument against WoW, or any basic advanced metric stat like WS or even PER, is that it relies entirely on play-by-play box score numbers and completely discredits defense, role, chemistry, etc..it also overvalues shooting efficiency and rebounding, which is why a guy like Faried is so overrated by these numbers..

Using these numbers as part of your argument in combination with +/-numbers, roles and eye test is far more effective than using a single set of numbers based entirely on box score numbers..

[da_suns_fan]

List of "elite" players who can get their own shot off and also shoot BETTER than Carmelo:

Duncan, durant, Lebron, Wade, Kobe, Harden, Z-Bo, Dirk, Pierce, Garnett, Aldridge, Millsap, Brook Lopez, Bosh (then i got bored)

Now, knowing that Carmelo is BELOW AVERAGE in every non shooting statistical category (rebounding, steals, assists, turnovers etc), why should he be ALL-NBA when so many players are so vastly superior to him performing the same role?

[Phillip]

My argument against WoW, or any basic advanced metric stat like WS or even PER, is that it relies entirely on play-by-play box score numbers and completely discredits defense, role, chemistry, etc..it also overvalues shooting efficiency and rebounding, which is why a guy like Faried is so overrated by these numbers..

This.

These stats are nice, but have to be combined with an eye-test, for factors that cannot be measured by stats or any sort of math. By themselves though, they generally can give a very flawed picture of a player.

[Phillip]

List of "elite" players who can get their own shot off and also shoot BETTER than Carmelo:

Duncan, durant, Lebron, Wade, Kobe, Harden, Z-Bo, Dirk, Pierce, Garnett, Aldridge, Millsap, Brook Lopez, Bosh (then i got bored)

Now, knowing that Carmelo is BELOW AVERAGE in every non shooting statistical category (rebounding, steals, assists, turnovers etc), why should he be ALL-NBA when so many players are so vastly superior to him performing the same role?

Because many of them are not better basketball players than Carmelo.

Simple as that.

[HarlemHeat37]

Interesting, but Im pretty sure you skimmed it and didnt actually read it.

Dude looks at playoff production and writes: The key we should all note is that the playoffs are very limited number of games. Over 20 games any NBA player can have a great run.

And youre not arguing against any of his conclusions specifically, just summing up that wages of wins cant be right because it "just cant" which is the typical lazy analysis used by most nba pundits.

A 20 game playoffs sample size is still significant, but the point is that the numbers are completely discrediting the roles on the team..

[Mugen]

@ the original post tbh......

[-21-]

Nobody really posted their All-NBA picks. LOL

[rayjayjohnson]

1st:

- paul
- bryant
- durrant
- bron bron
- marc gasol

2nd

- kyrie
- wade
- lee
- duncan
- chandler

3rd

- steph curry
- paul george
- iggy
- melo (regrettably)
- noah

parker was a 2nd team lock until he started sucking massive the past month

[spurraider21]

Uh, ya, the Wages of Wins formulas you referenced in the article I clicked on involve WP48..I used WoW stats when I began using advanced stats, until I realized how flawed their numbers are, tbh..

Also, I said both elite defender and elite rebounder, like a Ben Wallace..Faried is a mediocre defender that can't create a shot for himself, there's absolutely no logical all-NBA argument for a player that can't get stops and can't create his own shot..

ESPN talks about him a lot and he does crazy dunks and they call him Manimal

[spurraider21]

Nonsense.

It doesnt matter where Carmelo works out of. The fact is that he doesnt put in the basket any better than the average small forward in the league. If hes so good, why is he so AVERAGE?

And if working of screens is "easier", then why doesnt he work off screens? The truth is running around screens all game is physically exhausting and he'd rather not do it because hes a lazy player.

Its this laziness that leads to his poor rebounding and passing numbers as well.

Kawhi leonard is a 49% shooter and Melo is a 45% shooter. Therefore the Knicks should trade Melo for Kawhi since he is more accurate

[spurraider21]

Kawhi leonard is a 49% shooter and Melo is a 45% shooter. Therefore the Knicks should trade Melo for Kawhi since he is more accurate

Also, by your logic, how the is Harden all NBA first team with his fg%. Its because he's lazy. He takes inefficient shots. Doesn't belong in first team. Ur logic rivals that of a wall.

G - Chris Paul
G - Kobe Bryant
F - LeBron
F - Durant
C - Joakim Noah

2nd team:

G - Harden
G - Parker
F - Duncan
F - Melo
C - Dwight

3rd team

G - Wade
G - Westbrook
F - Blake Griffin
F - want to put Bosh, but he's a center this year. Ibaka
C - Marc Gasol

[da_suns_fan]

Also, by your logic, how the is Harden all NBA first team with his fg%. Its because he's lazy. He takes inefficient shots. Doesn't belong in first team. Ur logic rivals that of a wall.

No, you are lazy.

Not all shots are worth the same amount of points. Hardens field goal percentage is driven down by the fact that he takes a lot of three pointers. He also gets to free throw line at an incredible rate. And unlike Carmelo, he actually has a positive assist-to-turnover ratio (around 2 assists per turnover whereas Carmelo is in the NEGATIVE).

James Harden has a point per shot rating 1.52....rivaled only by the likes of Lebron and Durant.

http://www.thenbageek.com/players/co..._ids%5B%5D=229

Thanks for pointing out that you, too, are completely clueless.

[da_suns_fan]

This.

These stats are nice, but have to be combined with an eye-test, for factors that cannot be measured by stats or any sort of math. By themselves though, they generally can give a very flawed picture of a player.

Because many of them are not better basketball players than Carmelo.

Simple as that.

Textbook lazy analysis.

Let the NBA Geek explain:

Here's the thing. When I present an argument based on a statistical analysis (such as my claim that Kevin Love is better than LaMarcus Aldridge -- you knew I'd bring that up, right?), if you say something like "The stats cloud the truth" or "You need to get your nose out of the stats and watch the game" or "Anyone can SEE that this not true," you are, let's face it, just making up. You're just saying "that's not true because I know better." And there's a reason that when you tried that argument in your 8th grade science class, your teacher was unmoved. If you think that the statistics are lying, you need to demonstrate how or provide some reasoning that a particular piece of data misrepresents the truth. For instance, when David Berri critiques John Hollinger's PER, he mentions that the metric does not penalize players for missed field goal attempts, and goes on to explain why he believes so. This is the basis for a debate. John can refute this claim by presenting some further data if he so chooses.

Claiming that I don't watch the games isn't a good refutation (and, let's be serious here, you are going to claim that you have seen more TIMBERWOLVES games than me? Oh please. Nobody else watches them play). Or claiming that you "see" things that I do not "see" when we have both watched the same amount of basketball is also pretty unlikely to lead anywhere but us shouting "Yes!" and "No!" back-and-forth.

By the way, there's nothing wrong with expressing an opinion. I'm fine with you saying "I think Aldridge is better than Love and you'll never convince me otherwise." I'm not ok, however, with you dressing up this opinion as fact unless you want to get into a debate. One that, unfortunately, is going to have to involve stats, because you will forgive me if I don't accept "because everybody can see that" as actual evidence. And if you want to tell me the statistics are "lying", you have to actually explain why.

[Phillip]

Textbook lazy analysis.

Let the NBA Geek explain:

Here's the thing. When I present an argument based on a statistical analysis (such as my claim that Kevin Love is better than LaMarcus Aldridge -- you knew I'd bring that up, right?), if you say something like "The stats cloud the truth" or "You need to get your nose out of the stats and watch the game" or "Anyone can SEE that this not true," you are, let's face it, just making up. You're just saying "that's not true because I know better." And there's a reason that when you tried that argument in your 8th grade science class, your teacher was unmoved. If you think that the statistics are lying, you need to demonstrate how or provide some reasoning that a particular piece of data misrepresents the truth. For instance, when David Berri critiques John Hollinger's PER, he mentions that the metric does not penalize players for missed field goal attempts, and goes on to explain why he believes so. This is the basis for a debate. John can refute this claim by presenting some further data if he so chooses.

Claiming that I don't watch the games isn't a good refutation (and, let's be serious here, you are going to claim that you have seen more TIMBERWOLVES games than me? Oh please. Nobody else watches them play). Or claiming that you "see" things that I do not "see" when we have both watched the same amount of basketball is also pretty unlikely to lead anywhere but us shouting "Yes!" and "No!" back-and-forth.

By the way, there's nothing wrong with expressing an opinion. I'm fine with you saying "I think Aldridge is better than Love and you'll never convince me otherwise." I'm not ok, however, with you dressing up this opinion as fact unless you want to get into a debate. One that, unfortunately, is going to have to involve stats, because you will forgive me if I don't accept "because everybody can see that" as actual evidence. And if you want to tell me the statistics are "lying", you have to actually explain why.

Neat. Unfortunately none of this applies to you, because you have the IQ of a pile of .

[da_suns_fan]

ESPN talks about him a lot and he does crazy dunks and they call him Manimal

Actually its because he rebounds like crazy, shoots a high percentage, gets lots of blocks and steals, never turns it over etc.

Thanks for playing.

[ohmwrecker]

This...OP is one of the worst posters on ST

You sure about that?

lol parker in any discussions about any form of awards....

[da_suns_fan]

Neat. Unfortunately none of this applies to you, because you have the IQ of a pile of .

Yet Ive shown you that Carmelo doesnt do anything except take a lot of shots. Your counter argument is that you can "see" that he is a good player, but your mind is playing tricks on you since you refuse to remember Carmelo missing a LOT of shots.

Your argument is irrational because theres literally NOTHING anyone can show or explain to you that would change your mind. If other small forwards shot the ball at a worse rate than carmelo or rebounded at a worse rate than carmelo etc, then I would say he is an exceptional player. But the fact is that they dont.