Reply With Quote
Any single game stat is "useless" by itself. Getting a whole bunch of steals in a game doesn't mean a player played good defense. Does that make steals a poor stat? Depends on what you're trying to do with it.
Sean is right. Single game, box score +/- is useless.
The +/- metric we "lean" on here is RAPM.
Any single game stat is "useless" by itself. Getting a whole bunch of steals in a game doesn't mean a player played good defense. Does that make steals a poor stat? Depends on what you're trying to do with it.
Plus/minus is a dumbass stat.
If matt Bonner was a match up problem he would play every game. He should never have playing time on the Spurs.
Is this a serious post?
You of all people should know sarcasm when he sees it.
First of all everyone let's remember Coach B is like 200 in NBA role player years. He is really just transitioning into his new Scout team and D league assistant head Coach role. He's fairly handy to have around at practices as well. The first few years he was with the spurs while he wasn't a great defender he wasn't horrible. Then while he was king of +/- a few years ago he was actually an above average post defender and at times even provided timely help D. He did get posterized a lot but that was in part because he played lots of ball denial and positional D and always had below average lateral quickness. He was also for a few years basically the first big off the bench when he talent level was not at third big à
agreed my man
That's a peculiar sense of humor.
Plus/minus is only useful for line-up groupings over time. By itself or as a single game stat it is crap. So I get what Sean was trying to say he just worded it poorly.
Sample size cures almost everything. I agree that plus-minus is more useful faster for lineups than individuals (increasing degrees of freedom decreases the t-value necessary to be significant), but once individual sample sizes reach their threshold, their more informative.
Bonner carried an elite plus-minus despite playing in many different lineups and over many years of service. So to assert that he's simply a product of his lineups is borderline irresponsible, and probably relatively easy to disprove. I wouldn't know for sure, though. Does anyone have his player-pair data?
Tell me why doesn't matt bonner get more playing time if he is a match up problem?
Because he's old and doesn't have a unique skill-set anymore? The Spurs are inundated with shooting bigs.
But those bigs probably don't match up with matty in plus/minus.
O ya. Because Pop doesn't use them as human victory cigars vs the end of the player bench that don't get any burn or spot minutes with the second unit(maybe). Always fresh and never tired in short minutes.
Yeah, because Bonner's been in that fifth-big role his entire career...
I'm looking at his metrics and playing time correlation with winning in the playoffs. Dude is an impostor.
If you mean in the playoffs, that's a different story. Bonner's not really clutch, so when teams decide to make him beat them, he can rarely do it. He was great against OKC, though. One of the biggest reasons the Spurs took Game Five. But anyway, obviously a shooter who is cold isn't really going to help, especially when teams start gameplanning for you to go cold. The Heat tried the same thing with Green, and Danny went nuclear for five games. That's why Danny is making seven figures is considered underpaid and Bonner at $4 Million in 2011 was overpaid.
Hasn't +/- over the course of a season been fairly accurate over the years? For example, guys like Timmy/Manu/Kawhi are always near the top and known cancers like Enrique near the bottom?
Bonner was really the only anomaly but I agree with Chinook that the effect of his ability to space the floor has always been underrated.
The biggest reason was Kawhi putting the clamps on Westbrook.
Basic Box Score Stats Starters MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS +/- Kawhi Leonard 32:37 4 7 .571 1 2 .500 5 5 1.000 1 6 7 2 2 0 1 3 14 +22 Tim Duncan 29:50 8 13 .615 0 0 6 7 .857 2 10 12 2 0 1 2 2 22 +18 Tony Parker 29:35 6 13 .462 0 1 .000 0 0 1 3 4 4 1 0 2 1 12 +15 Danny Green 22:23 4 9 .444 4 8 .500 2 2 1.000 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 2 14 +14 Matt Bonner 17:26 0 4 .000 0 2 .000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 +6 Reserves MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS +/- Boris Diaw 28:10 4 7 .571 2 2 1.000 3 4 .750 3 3 6 3 1 1 2 0 13 +19 Manu Ginobili 21:10 7 9 .778 3 4 .750 2 2 1.000 0 4 4 6 0 0 0 2 19 +15 Patrick Mills 15:52 3 5 .600 3 5 .600 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 9 +14 Marco Belinelli 13:45 1 5 .200 0 2 .000 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 +8 Tiago Splitter 11:45 0 0 0 0 6 8 .750 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 3 6 +16 Cory Joseph 7:29 1 2 .500 0 0 2 2 1.000 0 2 2 3 1 0 1 0 4 -5 Jeff Ayres 6:21 1 2 .500 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 -3 Aron Baynes 3:37 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 2 1 0 +1
I'd say playing at home was the second biggest. The big 3 having good games especially Manu.
I'd probably put Matt in the same league as the other role players tbh.
That's because you don't actually remember that game, as we have discussed. Matt was unreal defensively in that game. He completely shut down Ibaka and even KD on switches. Dude had the game on his life on that end. And Brooks seemed to think the Thunder's best strategy to attack the Spurs would be to let Westbrook take Kawhi, KD Green and Ibaka Bonner in iso plays. It failed really badly.
You are very right on this (what it means for Bonner).People who think Bonner somehow disproves plus-minus are clueless. The fact that Bonner carries an elite score in that stat despite being at best a mediocre player underscores how powerful his position is. Bonner headlined an entire movement as a stretch-four. He was one of the first guys to show that having a shooting big could work, and furthermore that it can run a twin-towers lineup off the court. He's the reason why Memphis is a dinosaur, who finally seems to have started the change with Green starting the last game.
Plus-minus doesn't suggest that Bonner is a great player. It does suggest that he's a match-up problem.
People just take +/- out of context game to game for their own agenda and that is what is worth criticizing. It is not illustrative of how well someone played in a particular game. Sometimes one player in a bad Pop lineup was the only thing preventing a full collapse, but he just happened to play when the other team made a run, or someone with a bad game went on a scrubby streak. It's just too easy and lazy to infer more from it in a single game than what the stat is reflecting.
That's because you don't actually remember that game beyond with ESPN tells you, as we have discussed. Matt was unreal defensively in that game. He completely shut down Ibaka and even KD on switches. Dude had the game on his life on that end. And Brooks seemed to think the Thunder's best strategy to attack the Spurs would be to let Westbrook take Kawhi, KD Green and Ibaka Bonner in iso plays. It failed really badly.
His best game of his life is an average game to normal players. Go back and watch Pop put Kawhi defend Westbrook which I don't think Pop had done before and watch Manu too. Stop your agenda please.
You're shook. Stop embarrassing yourself too. Matt bonner a better game than Kawhi and Manu. WOW.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
