Reply With Quote
We gotta get Birn in here to complain about someone analyzing shooting motions.
Pop should have benched him weeks ago. His head's not right. Pop also should give him more time as the team's designated on-ball defender. Besides that Knicks game, Green has been an afterthought on both sides for most of the season. So if he's on the bench, Pop can sub Kawhi at a reasonable time and have Danny spend minutes on the Durants, Melos and Jameses, who he defends well. And Pop can call plays for Green (especially ones inside the arc) that he just doesn't call with the first unit.
In the interim, you can give Anderson/Simmons more time with the starters. That will be good in general and especially if Green can't come back. As of right now, Pop's "I haven't said anything to him about it", just seems silly. He's been tough-loving Danny his whole career, and now he's just going to not say anything to him?
We gotta get Birn in here to complain about someone analyzing shooting motions.
The largest sample of all would be this season, and that sample says it's not an anomaly.
No. Pretty sure his career numbers are a far larger sample.
I suspect Pop is pretty happy with Green's defense.
I would not have expected you to have this opinion, since you are his strong supporter. I do think it makes a whole lot of sense what you propose.
No. 1 Kawhi rests a few minutes. He already does a lot and has a burden offensively that requires him to get to close the game out with fresh legs.
No. 2: Both Simmons and Anderson get more opportunities. Simmons specially has already come through some games. He needs more experience and may have to bail guys out in the hothouse that is the playoffs. He could use playing against starters to get more seasoning and also so the coaches can determine whether or not he really can handle playoff compe ion this season.
No. 3. Anderson has played quality minutes against some play-off teams already but he's been pushed out, lacking opportunities. He's bailed out Diaw in 3 games already. Two were playoff teams. I don't see him playing in the postseason at all bc of his lack of opportunities to get experience. He simply won't be ready at this rate, and you never know how matches will work themselves out, who will get foul trouble, or who is going to leave his game at home. He can play, there is just no playing time without benching someone valuable.
Early season it looked like the intention was for Manu to rest more games than he's rested. I suspected that was to get younger guys experience and get them ready fir Manu's retirement and soon larger roles as well as for Manu's benefit. But I fear GSW hot start coupled with the team's reliance on Manu to rescue cold/slow starts in games have edged Anderson out through no fault of his own. And Manu's own compe ive spirit will not allow him to defer. Simmons emergence and need for experience has also been a factor but none of those things are within Anderson's control. He can only control his effort in whatever chances he gets and he's played well.
Since you've been arguing whether or not to include one game to bump up his average, both the season and career numbers are larger samples. I don't care which we use, but we'll look at his career numbers since you mentioned it.
His three point percentage by year has been 44, 43, 42, 42, and this year it's 33. He's shot 42 percent from three up until this year.
A 23 percent drop in his three point shooting over a half a season is more than an anomaly.
I don't think anyone that wants him benched is in favor of it as a means to run Danny out of the rotation. It's because we support him that we see how much the team's going to need him, and something needs to be done pretty soon. I imagine the Warriors game will be his final exam.
His career number is one number. You're looking at his seasonal averages. And then comparing them to half a season.
I am comparing the months of Nov and Dec to his single career regular season number of .410, and yes, those two months are closer to being an anomaly than January is, thus far, which is what SAgirl is saying, because his January number contains one particularly good game.
The term "reversion to the mean" is probably a textbook application, here.
Danny was never a great player, and he isn't broken now. He's in between. He is what he is, and he'll shoot better in the future. He may already be shooting better, but January isn't enough evidence to convince anyone.
I posit that if he doesn't dribble and turnover the ball, his shooting woes aren't nearly as demonized by viewers. His errors handling the ball exaggerate his ineffectiveness.
I listed his season averages, then I looked at his career number with the Spurs, and compared it to this season. His percentage has gone down by nearly a quarter. That's pretty broken.
Sorry, but one game doesn't cons ute regression to the mean. I think doing something to snap him out of his funk will encourage that, but it's pretty tough to put lipstick on the pig that's his shooting through 42 games.
No one said one game cons utes regression toward the mean. But, you can't throw it out, either, which is what you seem to be wanting to do, or at least as SAgirl is wanting to do. That is as much part of the data set as is his bad numbers. There is no reason to throw it out except that it doesn't fit the narrative that he is now a 33% shooter. But, throw out the data if you want, even if it constructs a month that is pretty much right in line with his large sample career number.
And, no one's been trying to put lipstick on a pig that has been his shooting for the first half of the season. It's pretty well do ented that it's been bad in comparison to his career number. The exception being that January is shaping up better and may be a start toward a reversion toward the mean. The fact that it's skewed a little by one game doesn't really matter if you look back at it next year and he shot 41% for the rest of this year. It's made a big deal of here and now, though, but it shouldn't matter much.
But, sure, 33% is pretty bad for him. No argument.
The obsession with throwing out that game because it was "one game" though, that just doesnt work. A month is made up of maybe 10 games. You don't just get to throw out 10% of the data because it doesn't fit the narrative, and again, January is right in line with his career number. If you sprinkle those makes over three or four games it makes him more consistent, but doesn't change the monthy shooting percentage, so who GAF?
And these last two months, using a null hypothesis that he is a 41% career shooter, I have to say that Nov and Dec being .33 or whatever, doubtfully cause you to reject the null. But, whatevs.
Danny is not a career .41 shooter from 3. Due to his performance in Nov and Dec, he is now a .33 3 point shooter.
I concede.
Last edited by littlecoyotecoin; 01-21-2016 at 12:29 PM.
Pop likely hasn't made too many changes because he won't knee-jerk to two months of bad shooting during a time when they've been implementing changes. He's even-keeled, and probably believes things will level out. Seems reasonable to me.
Green doesn't need to even look at the stats to know he is 'sucking'. Tim Duncun said so himself.
However, you are right that the big 20 percentage point drop is not an anomaly. Green's real problem is his lack of urgency. If you are blowing away teams, then you don't really need to perform.
Duncan said that because he doesn't think it's a big deal, either. It's good-natured ribbing.
When a guy goes ofer in a game, you don't then expect him to go ofer in every game thereafter. You get to see an improvement in the next game. When Danny has a couple of bad months, it will take months to see a correction in monthly numbers, but those two months aren't anything to worry about in the long-term, necessarily. I would worry after a much longerer sequence. That being said, yea...Danny has sucked.
So far this season, he has put up 178 3P attempts. That is more than an adequate sample size to conclude that something has changed this year, vs. his prior seasons. End of story on sample size.
It really doesn't matter what Danny has done over his career. That's for people on fan sites to use for Top 10 lists. In professional sports, all that matters is what you're doing right now - more to the point, what you are going to do next game. With half a season in the books, you have to assume that Danny's next game is going to be a lot like most of the other games he's played this season. Well... YOU don't have to assume that, because your season isn't on the line. But Pop and the rest of Spurs' management will be looking at it exactly the way I just said. You're confident that he will start playing better this season, because he played better before.
I was a Danny Green fan from the first pre-season game he played in SA. But right now, I'm much more concerned with the fact that I see his confidence problems bleeding over into his defense. The players in the NBA are so good, and so fast, if you have any hesitation, they're going to burn you. If I'm reading it right, he's going to be a liability by playoff time. That's just an opinion because, believe it or not, some things are not a math function.
If you say it's the end of the story, I guess it's the end of the story, then.
If you say that 178 attempts is too small of a sample size, you're too ignorant to argue with. Either way, it's the end of that particular story.
And if you want to use sarcasm, you'll have to do better than that.
I never said it was too small of a sample. You're reading into things and putting words in my mouth. I know what an outlier is, and you can't throw them out just because you want to. Throwing them out when they are close to the population mean is even more suspect. And, I am trying to forget as much statistics as possible, but I haven't forgotten enough.
And, no, he's NOT a career .33 shooter? That statement is not correct.
I am not trying to pretend to know anything, but that doesn't mean I have to listen to bunk. I have, unfortunately, probably, taken more statistics classes than most people here.
I am definitely fallible, but I don't think I am about any of this.
And, lastly, of course things have changed. I stated as such, several times.
178 attempts, compared to his body of work, is a relatively small sample. Yes. Depends upon what you're looking at.
You don't think looking at his career numbers is valid, I guess. I still do. Danny is not some old vet at the end of his career. Waning years would be outliers, as well as rookie sop re years. But, we are even including his rookie and sop re years in the career numbers, where he was a ty 3 point shooter. I see no reason to believe he can't resume a similar track based upon a lot of data. He's not injured, that we know of, he's in his prime, and he's on a well-coached team.
If I were to throw out that game he probably is under 30% for the season, that tells you I am not throwing the game out. What I said is that one game to me doesn't signal a trend that he's back per se and that he will shoot 42% the rest of the season, when he's been clanking very off the mark shots and something is going on in his head. I am not saying he all of a sudden can't shoot (I cited the Bonner, Timmy examples which were influenced by aging/injury and that is not Danny's case) but something is in his mind at this point throwing off his shot.
If anything it is not definitive. He may yet come back to his regular % the rest of the season. Hopefully he does bc if he's not hitting we are in trouble and we will need to implement Chinook's plan. Obviously his cold shooting is annoying bc he doesn't bring much else offensively and still has mental farts. It annoys me less that Patty has been cold a few games already bc Patty is not prone to the series of boneheaded plays Danny is capable of and Patty can put points on the board coming off screens. Danny doesn't. He actually gets some of the easiest shots anyone else is getting and not making them.
Anyways I haven't been a fan of benching him for poor shooting. But we have a tough schedule coming up and if he's not hitting, Pop is going to again go to Simmons, maybe Anderson too. It's up to Danny.
That is not to imply n=30 small, etc, or anything, I might add. Just generally speaking. It's also not a random sample from the population.
I certainly don't think it's impossible (or highly unlikely) that Danny turns things around...but with less than half the season remaining, I don't know how anyone could be so confident that he'll get back on track. He's always been fairly streaky, but he's now been in an "icy" period spanning over 40 games and 150+ attempts. I wasn't too worried about it early on, but it's hard not to be at this point.
Doesn't help that Patty also seems to be struggling this year. Two of our highest volume 3-point shooters struggling is certainly worrisome.
If you throw it out, which you can't, or shouldn't, he's still .305, not that it really matters.
Yeah. I don't want to overstate it, either. I am confident that he will probably improve, but I would quantify by how much. And, over time, probably back to close to career numbers, but that may take more time than is in the season. But, even him just breaking into the upper 30's would help quite a bit...he doesn't have to overshoot to upper 40's to balance Nov and Dec to help us for the remainder of the season. As long as he moves in the right direction, it's all gravy, as we're doing pretty darn good even w/ him at .33. In the playoffs, it would be nice to see him peaking at whatever he can peak at, though, and not be in this trough.
There you go and you know I never threw it out statistically bc you made the math calculation for me.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
