Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2891011121314 LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 341
  1. #276
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    do you think repeating these "nicknames" enhances your argument, tbh?
    . See? Told you I appreciate good Philo'ing. That thread wasn't made to troll you, but to honor you.
    _____________________________

  2. #277
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    No, if they were that concerned with Terry beating them over Dirk, they would've spied him. Players that teams gameplan to stop don't get shots like these off of secondary action:

    Dirk created that absurdly wide open shot. Bosh could've stayed home as the "spy," Miller could've switched, but got sucked in the moment Dirk caught the ball.

    The Heatles defensive philosophy was to pressure/blitz the 1-5 ball handler on PnRs w/ Bosh & force them to make lateral passes except JET made the perfect bounce pass to Dork which created a 2-on-1 situation. Wade, the only back-line defender, had to scramble to Dork to prevent a wide open jumper & Miller had to scramble towards Marion who was going to get a wide open dunk. The defenders that were setting up the trap didn't even know where to rotate as they had their back to the ball & were simply retreating to cover real-estate.


    Anyhow, I refuse to play this game any more (don't waste your time posting youtubes like Kool. I won't be responding).
    Aka You Ain't Got the Evidence

    I can bring up situations where Lowry created advantageous situations for Kawhi. Again, since the point seems to be lost on you, no player is a one man team. Players get help from the sidekicks and role players all the time during title runs. Kawhi's run wasn't a unique circumstance.
    Enlighten me with the situation where Lowry was creating advantageous situations for Kawhi during CRUNCH TIME, if anything dude was being left WIDE open b/c the defense was so worried about Kawhi.

    On/off is a much better stat than raw BPM. BPM does not factor in defensive impact. If anything, on/off is the better impact stat to use in evaluating Kawhi's run since he's an impactful defensive player. Something like BPM would actually punish two way players more.
    Find a better stat, then. You want to use BPM? then Kiwi falls behind more players and runs. So feel free.
    Spreadsheet McBuster, where have I said SOLEY using BPM is the appropriate metric for judging "ALL-TIme" runs?

    A person who basis their argument on advance metrics without providing context is the equivalent of a machine which severely lack critical thinking skills.

    GOAT Draymond carried Wardell in '15: https://www.basketball-reference.com...ayoffs_pbp::11

  3. #278
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Anyhow,. I'm tired of arguing about how great Kawhi's run was. People also misunderstand me. I'm not shitting on his run, but think about what "all time great" fuckin means? There's only been like 43 seasons since the NBA merger, and in the pre-merger NBA, you really didn't get "runs" where a superstar was a tier above his teammates since there was only like 8 teams, so great teams then had like 4 or 5 "superstar players" on the same squad. When we say all time great player, we typically mean a hall of fame player, and only 6 percent of NBA players will make the Hall of Fame. I'll be more generous and say the top 5 runs since the merger are the NBA's all-time great runs. Kawhi's run isn't top 5 since the merger. And if we count pre-merger runs (72 seasons), Kawhi's isn't top 10, either.

    Off the top of my head in no order:

    Hakeem in '95
    Duncan in '03
    Lebron in '16
    Jordan in '91
    Magic in '80

  4. #279
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Advanced metrics are more reliable than eye tests and "contexts," because contexts can be arbitrarily chosen and skewed to fit an argument, as you're doing, i.e. "Well, Dirk was aided by this, that, this, this here; the opposing defense did this thing and that which made it easier for Dirk to do this thing. Meanwhile, Kawhi didn't have those luxuries!"

    You don't have any "evidence," either. All you're doing is cherry picking specific plays and situations from hours upon hours of gameplay. And even the "evidence" you're showing isn't compelling. "Oh wow. You mean the Heat were concerned about a good 3 point shooter and it opened things up a bit! That's never happen before in the history of basketball!"

    Stats cut through the bullshit. Here:

    Dirk '11: +16.8
    Kawhi '19: +15.9

    It hurts, I know.

  5. #280
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    Advanced metrics are more reliable than eye tests and "contexts," because contexts can be arbitrarily chosen and skewed to fit an argument, as you're doing, i.e. "Well, Dirk was aided by this, that, this, this here; the opposing defense did this thing and that which made it easier for Dirk to do this thing. Meanwhile, Kawhi didn't have those luxuries!"

    You don't have any "evidence," either. All you're doing is cherry picking specific plays and situations from hours upon hours of gameplay. And even the "evidence" you're showing isn't compelling. "Oh wow. You mean the Heat were concerned about a good 3 point shooter and it opened things up a bit! That's never happen before in the history of basketball!"
    Talk about the kettle calling the pot black

    Muphucka cherry picked Dork scoring transition buckets during a "9-0" to glorify his ALL-TIME run while ignoring they would have been dead & buried if JET didn't score 8 straight midway through the 4th to dig them out of a 12 point deficit.

    But....but...but...scoring in the 4th quarter doesn't count more than it does in the 1st. Game 4 of the 2019 Finals never happened.




    Stats cut through the bullshit. Here:

    Dirk '11: +16.8
    Kawhi '19: +15.9

    It hurts, I know.
    I would be hurting if the on/off didn't suggest that '01 Shaq should have been benched for Mark Madsen

  6. #281
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    Anyhow,. I'm tired of arguing about how great Kawhi's run was. People also misunderstand me. I'm not shitting on his run, but think about what "all time great" fuckin means? There's only been like 43 seasons since the NBA merger, and in the pre-merger NBA, you really didn't get "runs" where a superstar was a tier above his teammates since there was only like 8 teams, so great teams then had like 4 or 5 "superstar players" on the same squad. When we say all time great player, we typically mean a hall of fame player, and only 6 percent of NBA players will make the Hall of Fame. I'll be more generous and say the top 5 runs since the merger are the NBA's all-time great runs. Kawhi's run isn't top 5 since the merger. And if we count pre-merger runs (72 seasons), Kawhi's isn't top 10, either.

    Off the top of my head in no order:

    Hakeem in '95
    Duncan in '03
    Lebron in '16
    Jordan in '91
    Magic in '80
    On/off didn't exist pre-2001 so we'll NEVER know if '91 Jordan had an 'ALL-TIME" run after getting cucked by Magic in Gm 1, shooting 11/28 in Gm 3 & getting outplayed by Pippen in the clincher

  7. #282
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Talk about the kettle calling the pot black

    Muphucka cherry picked Dork scoring transition buckets during a "9-0" to glorify his ALL-TIME run while ignoring they would have been dead & buried if JET didn't score 8 straight midway through the 4th to dig them out of a 12 point deficit.

    But....but...but...scoring in the 4th quarter doesn't count more than it does in the 1st. Game 4 of the 2019 Finals never happened.






    I would be hurting if the on/off didn't suggest that '01 Shaq should have been benched for Mark Madsen
    I brought up Dirk's game 2 because I felt it differentiated it from Kawhi's run, since Kawhi didn't really have any memorable Finals moments. Dirk also had a better game 5. "All-time great" runs don't end with the player performing subpar in 3 of the 6 games and not being the best player for his team in the closeout game. Again, do you understand what "all time great" means?

    All stats have outliers. RPM suggests Danny Green was better than Kawhi Leonard in the regular season . He was also better than Westbrook, Draymond, among other star level players. But ultimately, these impact stats are better than per game stats of any sort. Make a more compelling statistical case if you don't like on/off.

    I can't prove a negative. You have to prove Kawhi's run was all-time great. I posted a list of the runs that I think are the all time great runs since the merger (saw your reply, and no, Jordan didn't get outplayed by Pippen. He shot better, had more assists than Scotty, a point forward, less turnovers, equal steals. No matter, Jordan's 92 or 93 run can also be there. I picked '91 because of the 32 PER and 13.8 BPM [yes, I know I criticized those stats, but there's nothing better to use for that era). Can you prove Kiwi belongs in the group?

    I'd probably place Kiwi's run top 20 since the merger, so in the +50th percentile, which qualifies it as a "solid superstar run."

  8. #283
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    I can't prove a negative. You have to prove Kawhi's run was all-time great. I posted a list of the runs that I think are the all time great runs since the merger (saw your reply, and no, Jordan didn't get outplayed by Pippen. He shot better, had more assists than Scotty, a point forward, less turnovers, equal steals. No matter, Jordan's 92 or 93 run can also be there. I picked '91 because of the 32 PER and 13.8 BPM [yes, I know I criticized those stats, but there's nothing better to use for that era). Can you prove Kiwi belongs in the group?
    Which combination of the advance stats is the holy grail since on/off data doesn't exist pre-2001?

    I'm going to use a baseline combination that won't exclude '03 Timmay or '95 Hakeem (Drexler had more WS) & I'm going to use a cutoff DWS to filter 2-way players since you don't believe in BPM thus DPM.

    '80 Magic is laughable when Kareem carried the team to the Finals & Sixers got cucked by Jamal Wilks (Magic had a fluke game that he NEVER replicated in his Finals career)

    To account for uneven games played, I sorted list based on WS/48: http://bkref.com/tiny/aX4EE

    For single seasons; played in the NBA/BAA; in the playoffs; from 1946-47 to 2018-19; requiring Points Per Game >= 24.6 and Field Goal Pct >= 0.480 and Defensive Win Shares >= 1.2 and Games >= 16; sorted by descending Win Shares Per 48 Minutes

    Bball Ref doesn't have a filter for championships thus, I've to do that manually:

    1) Michael Jordan 1990-91 27
    2) LeBron James 2011-12 27
    3) Tim Duncan 2002-03 26
    4) LeBron James 2015-16 31
    5) Larry Bird 1985-86 29
    6) LeBron James 2012-13 28
    7) Shaquille O'Neal 2000-01 28
    8) Kawhi Leonard 2018-19 27
    9) Dwyane Wade 2005-06 24
    10) Kevin Durant 2017-18 29
    11) Larry Bird 1983-84 27
    12) Shaquille O'Neal 2001-02 29
    13) Michael Jordan 1991-92 28
    14) Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 31
    15)Hakeem Olajuwon 1994-95 32

    Conclusion: Only DK, LeBron, Shaq, Bird & Timmay (aka ALL-TIME top 10 players) had a better LEGIT 2-way championship run than Kawhi since the merger.

    Tragic Johnson aka Curry 1.0 NEVER won shyt without Kareem, actually old ass Kareem was carrying him at times.

  9. #284
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Which combination of the advance stats is the holy grail since on/off data doesn't exist pre-2001?

    I'm going to use a baseline combination that won't exclude '03 Timmay or '95 Hakeem (Drexler had more WS) & I'm going to use a cutoff DWS to filter 2-way players since you don't believe in BPM thus DPM.

    '80 Magic is laughable when Kareem carried the team to the Finals & Sixers got cucked by Jamal Wilks (Magic had a fluke game that he NEVER replicated in his Finals career)

    To account for uneven games played, I sorted list based on WS/48: http://bkref.com/tiny/aX4EE

    For single seasons; played in the NBA/BAA; in the playoffs; from 1946-47 to 2018-19; requiring Points Per Game >= 24.6 and Field Goal Pct >= 0.480 and Defensive Win Shares >= 1.2 and Games >= 16; sorted by descending Win Shares Per 48 Minutes

    Bball Ref doesn't have a filter for championships thus, I've to do that manually:

    1) Michael Jordan 1990-91 27
    2) LeBron James 2011-12 27
    3) Tim Duncan 2002-03 26
    4) LeBron James 2015-16 31
    5) Larry Bird 1985-86 29
    6) LeBron James 2012-13 28
    7) Shaquille O'Neal 2000-01 28
    8) Kawhi Leonard 2018-19 27
    9) Dwyane Wade 2005-06 24
    10) Kevin Durant 2017-18 29
    11) Larry Bird 1983-84 27
    12) Shaquille O'Neal 2001-02 29
    13) Michael Jordan 1991-92 28
    14) Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 31
    15)Hakeem Olajuwon 1994-95 32

    Conclusion: Only DK, LeBron, Shaq, Bird & Timmay (aka ALL-TIME top 10 players) had a better LEGIT 2-way championship run than Kawhi since the merger.

    Tragic Johnson aka Curry 1.0 NEVER won shyt without Kareem, actually old ass Kareem was carrying him at times.
    Kareem didn't carry Magic. Magic had the highest BPM on the team. Of course he never replicated that game 6. Magic had to play emergency center and become the primary scoring option after Kareem got hurt. The fact he put up that line, as a rookie, playing out of position in game 6 road Finals game is extraordinary. Nothing Kiwi did in his cute Finals against a depleted team compares. And I hate Magic and the Lakers, but facts are facts. More proof you've only been watching basketball since 2014.

    So Kawhi ranks 8th in an estimate stat? That's all you have?

    The problem with estimate stats is that they assume too much and that they do rely solely on recorded stats (e.g. points, rebounds, steals, blocks, etc), so they don't take into account elements like presence, gravity, hockey assists, etc, etc.

    Calculate points produced for each player. In 2008-09, James had an estimated 2345.9 points produced.
    Calculate offensive possessions for each player. James had an estimated 1928.1 offensive possessions in 2008-09.
    Calculate marginal offense for each player. Marginal offense is equal to (points produced) - 0.92 * (league points per possession) * (offensive possessions). For James this is 2345.9 - 0.92 * 1.083 * 1928.1 = 424.8. Note that this formula may produce a negative result for some players.
    Calculate marginal points per win. Marginal points per win reduces to 0.32 * (league points per game) * ((team pace) / (league pace)). For the 2008-09 Cavaliers this is 0.32 * 100.0 * (88.7 / 91.7) = 30.95.
    Credit Offensive Win Shares to the players. Offensive Win Shares are credited using the following formula: (marginal offense) / (marginal points per win). James gets credit for 424.8 / 30.95 = 13.73 Offensive Win Shares.
    It's essentially PER dressed up in another way. I'm not totally dismissing the stat, but it's lacking when trying to quantify player impact through events that can't be recorded statistically. Adjusted plus/minus and on/off impact stats are the best we have at measuring overall player impact. If you're going to use win shares, just use the standard one because it at least estimates less than WS/48. Divide win share total by games played.

    Let's see how that works out:

    Duncan '03: 0.245 per game
    Duncan '99: 0.217 per game
    Lebron '12: 0.252 per game
    Lebron '13: 0.226 per game
    Lebron '16: 0.223 per game
    Jordan '91: 0.282 per game
    Wade '06: 0.208 per game
    Bird '86: 0.233 per game
    Shaq '01: 0.231 per game
    Kobe '01: 0.223 per game
    Kareem '80: 0.22 per game
    Magic '87: 0.205 per game
    Bird '84: 0.2043 per game
    Kiwi '19 0.2041 per game

    That's the "pure" form of the stat that doesn't need to estimate over 48 minutes, and Kawhi ranks 14th. And again, WS only considers traditional stats plus a formula. It doesn't take into account presence. Yeah, once again, all the evidence is pointing toward solid superstar run.
    Last edited by midnightpulp; 06-17-2019 at 12:05 AM.

  10. #285
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Oops, Kiwi ranks 14th. The only and one Kirbs enters the list with .223 WS in '01.

  11. #286
    Klaw apalisoc_9's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    23,280
    Dis nigga.

    Mid wont be able to name a defensive adjustment where the best player started guarding the opposing best player and completely changed the outcome of the series.


    Two way!!


    Top 15 all time.

    Spursfans so salty
    _____________________________

  12. #287
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Anyhow, let's review all the facts.

    Statistical facts:

    WS:

    Jordan '91: 0.282 per game
    Lebron '12: 0.252 per game
    Duncan '03: 0.245 per gam3
    Bird '86: 0.233 per game
    Shaq '01: 0.231 per game
    Lebron '13: 0.226 per game
    Kobe '01: 0.223 per game
    Lebron '16: 0.223 per game
    Kareem '80: 0.22 per game
    Duncan '99: 0.217 per game
    Wade '06: 0.208 per game
    Magic '87: 0.205 per game
    Bird '84: 0.2043 per game
    Kiwi '19 0.2041 per game

    Kiwi ranks 14th since the merger

    BPM:



    Again, 14th since the merger

    PER:



    8th since the merger

    On/off (the best stat in the bunch):

    Shaq, '02: +22.9
    Duncan, '03: +23.1
    Wade, '06: +22.2
    Lebron, '12: +24.3
    Lebron, '16: +21.1
    Curry, 17: +20.6
    Garnett, '08: +19.8
    Dirk, '11: +16.8
    Kawhi, '19: 15.9

    9th since '01. So it stands to reason if on/off was recorded pre-01, he'd fall 5 to 10 places (also note, Draymond Green has higher on/offs than Kiwi, as well).

    Contextual facts.

    Despite Kawhitstorm's spinning, Kiwi had plenty of help, no more or no less than any other title team has contributed in aiding their superstar centerpiece. The much maligned "Fat Lowry" had a stellar +12.8 on/off which was higher than any of Kevin Durant's with the Warriors. So I don't want to hear any shit about as if it were just him and Smush Parker out there.

    Every all-time great title run is capped off with dominating Finals closeout/back to the wall games. Okay, Kiwi shit himself in game 5. Time to step up in game 6 and drop 40. Nope. Kyle Lowry and Siakam were the Rap's two best players in game 6, and Andre Igoudala outscored him in the closeout game. I'll say it for the 600th time. "All time great" runs don't fizzle out like that, with the centerpiece player playing subpar in two consecutive closeout games. He's was also bad in game 1. And the most important fact is the Warriors were down KD for all but 10 minutes of the series and then lost a scorching Klay Thompson in game 6. Injuries are part of the game, but the Warriors injury badluck was unprecedented.

    Kawhitstorm can for the final reply. There's no more argument to made other than qualitative "well, x player had more help, faced worse teams, etc, etc."

  13. #288
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    Dis nigga.

    Mid wont be able to name a defensive adjustment where the best player started guarding the opposing best player and completely changed the outcome of the series.


    Two way!!


    Top 15 all time.

    Spursfans so salty
    On/off would account for any improved statistical impact Kawhi brought defensively. And at Kiwi being the only player to switch on the opponent's best player. Tim Duncan actually guarded Shaq as much as Robinson in 1v1 situations, with Shaq, who was much more of a threat than no-jumper Giannis, shot something like 40 percent while guarded by Duncan. In '09, Carmelo was killing the Lakers. Kobe guarded him for the rest of the series and shut him down.

    None of the better stats back up any claim Kiwi had some all-time great run.

  14. #289
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,794
    mid, your argument really seems to be results oriented. crap on bpm a page ago, but to refute Magic/Kareem, you go to BPM because it supports your position.

    you dismiss WS/48 because it ranks kawhi higher, but then have no problem creating WS/game because it ranks kawhi lower...

  15. #290
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    mid, your argument really seems to be results oriented. crap on bpm a page ago, but to refute Magic/Kareem, you go to BPM because it supports your position.

    you dismiss WS/48 because it ranks kawhi higher, but then have no problem creating WS/game because it ranks kawhi lower...
    Philo'ing. I included BPM because it was mentioned, so I'm using it out of courtesy in order to capture an all-around statistical picture. There's nothing I left out. PER is simply a summation of per game stats that adjusts for pace.

    Why would anyone use WS/48 when you can just use the more accurate WS stat? Do you understand what WS/48 does? It projects performance over 48 minutes, so it has to assume production would remain consistent with the sample. Why are per 48 stats less accurate? Say if a player had a dominant 24 minute performance, scoring something like 30 points. Per 48, he would average 60ppg in the game. WS/48 is more useful in trying to identify undervalued role players since they obviously don't play enough minutes to accrue an accurate raw WS stat. Patty Mills was a super role player in 2014. He ranked 3rd on the team in WS/48, ahead of Tim Duncan.

  16. #291
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,794
    Philo'ing. I included BPM because it was mentioned, so I'm using it out of courtesy in order to capture an all-around statistical picture. There's nothing I left out. PER is simply a summation of per game stats that adjusts for pace.

    Why would anyone use WS/48 when you can just use the more accurate WS stat? Do you understand what WS/48 does? It projects performance over 48 minutes, so it has to assume production would remain consistent with the sample. Why are per 48 stats less accurate? Say if a player had a dominant 24 minute performance, scoring something like 30 points. Per 48, he would average 60ppg in the game. WS/48 is more useful in trying to identify undervalued role players since they obviously don't play enough minutes to accrue an accurate raw WS stat. Patty Mills was a super role player in 2014. He ranked 3rd on the team in WS/48, ahead of Tim Duncan.
    brushing everything off as "philo'ing" is about as lazy and useless as kawhishitstorm's nickname usage. sometimes i troll (describing all of baseball as a minigame, for example ). but you're just inconsistent with your stat usage imho

    ws/48 is meant to normalize minutes, and obviously wouldnt work when comparing a 20mpg guy to a 38 mpg guy. but somebody dropping 30 points in 30 minutes is more valuable than (all other things being equal) somebody dropping 30 points in 38 minutes

  17. #292
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    brushing everything off as "philo'ing" is about as lazy and useless as kawhishitstorm's nickname usage. sometimes i troll (describing all of baseball as a minigame, for example ). but you're just inconsistent with your stat usage imho

    ws/48 is meant to normalize minutes, and obviously wouldnt work when comparing a 20mpg guy to a 38 mpg guy. but somebody dropping 30 points in 30 minutes is more valuable than (all other things being equal) somebody dropping 30 points in 38 minutes
    No, you're Philo'ing because I clearly stated why I had to resort to BPM for Magic/Kareem since there's no other impact stats available for that era. I'd like to use something else, but can't. Philio'ing is also picking a bone where there's really none to pick. Using every stat at our disposal, none of Kawhi's statistical impact lands in the top 5. You're acting like I'm dismissing WS/48 because it aids the argument. It doesn't. He still ranks 8th in that stat since merger, as well. Do you think a player who hasn't achieved a top 5 statistical place in any of these stats deserves to have his run called all-time great? I await more Philo'ing saying, "Well, it's kind of arbitrary you set the rank at the top 5." Again, only 43 seasons. When has ever the top 20 percent of anything been considered "all time great?"

    More on WS/48. It still has to assume the guy scoring 30 in 30 would keep pace with that production over the next whatever minutes. Why not just use the stat that doesn't have to project into the unknown? And yes, again, WS/48 normalizes because the stat seeks to find per minute value for players <20 min per game mark. Also a superstar player being able to play more minutes is inherently more valuable, because superstars impact the game in other ways aside from per game stats. This is why we use the +/- stats in favor of per game stats.
    Last edited by midnightpulp; 06-17-2019 at 01:53 AM.

  18. #293
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    mid, your argument really seems to be results oriented. crap on bpm a page ago, but to refute Magic/Kareem, you go to BPM because it supports your position.

    you dismiss WS/48 because it ranks kawhi higher, but then have no problem creating WS/game because it ranks kawhi lower...
    Also, bro, he was the one being sneaky, as he set the parameters to only include players who averaged more than 24.6 points per game on 48 percent shooting with over 1.2 DWS. Kawhi drops to 43rd total and 16 post merger for title runs when I set it to >15 points, >40 percent shooting >12 games played (no first round few years post merger).

    http://bkref.com/tiny/w5ugm

  19. #294
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    Also, bro, he was the one being sneaky, as he set the parameters to only include players who averaged more than 24.6 points per game on 48 percent shooting with over 1.2 DWS. Kawhi drops to 43rd total and 16 post merger for title runs when I set it to >15 points, >40 percent shooting >12 games played (no first round few years post merger).

    http://bkref.com/tiny/w5ugm
    >15 points, >40 percent shooting

    '10 Jason Richardson > '95 Hakeem

    Off the top of my head in no order:

    Hakeem in '95
    Duncan in '03
    Lebron in '16
    Jordan in '91
    Magic in '80
    Spreadsheet McBusters in shambles

  20. #295
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    >15 points, >40 percent shooting

    '10 Jason Richardson > '95 Hakeem



    Spreadsheet McBusters in shambles
    You're the dumbshit that insisted on using WS/48. Now that we removed the arbitrary parameters you used to filter out players who would rank ahead of Kiwi (fun fact: you can impact a game in other ways aside from scoring/efficiency), we see the flaw of the stat, don't we? Furthermore, Jason Richardson was on fire for that run. 19.8 ppg on .636 TS (higher than Kiwi's), so of course he's going to have impact, retard.

  21. #296
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    Kareem didn't carry Magic. Magic had the highest BPM on the team. Of course he never replicated that game 6.
    According to SOLEY BPM, Tiago Shitter was the best player on the '14 Spurs despite getting benched for Diaw in the Finals: https://www.basketball-reference.com...s_advanced::25

    And based on the holy-grail that is known as on/off, Timmay (-0.8) should have been benched for GOAT Aaron Baynes: https://www.basketball-reference.com...ayoffs_pbp::11


    Magic had to play emergency center and become the primary scoring option after Kareem got hurt. The fact he put up that line, as a rookie, playing out of position in game 6 road Finals game is extraordinary.
    Would have been impressive if Jamal "Silk" Wilks didn't drop 37/10 on Dr. J


    Nothing Kiwi did in his cute Finals against a depleted team compares. And I hate Magic and the Lakers, but facts are facts. More proof you've only been watching basketball since 2014.
    Yeah, I'm pretty sure the Duds were "depleted" in Gm 4 when Kiwi annihilated them on the road along w/ being the one that stepped to PEAK LeBrat on BOTH ends & on the road with the series tied 1-1.


    The problem with estimate stats is that they assume too much and that they do rely solely on recorded stats (e.g. points, rebounds, steals, blocks, etc), so they don't take into account elements like presence, gravity, hockey assists, etc, etc.

    It's essentially PER dressed up in another way. I'm not totally dismissing the stat, but it's lacking when trying to quantify player impact through events that can't be recorded statistically. Adjusted plus/minus and on/off impact stats are the best we have at measuring overall player impact.
    You are out here contradicting yourself with every other response.
    You are the "analytics" evangelist but run away from it when it doesn't fit your narrative.


    The "best" metric at measuring "overall" impact suggested '01 Lakers should have benched PEAK Shaq for Mark Madsen & '14 Spurs should have benched Timmay (the player you claimed was the best on the team) for Baynes.

    Draymond Green carried Wardell w/ his 50% TS when Donkey was benched in GM 3 for David Lee in the Finals b/c he didn't know what to do in a 4-on-5 situation

    If you're going to use win shares, just use the standard one because it at least estimates less than WS/48. Divide win share total by games played. That's the "pure" form of the stat that doesn't need to estimate over 48 minutes.
    Spreadsheet McBuster, there is such a thing called minutes otherwise '16-'17 Jimmy Butler was as good as Kawhi.
    Since 48 minutes is an estimate why don't we just use WS/36 thus won't have to ESTIMATE since EVERYONE played at least 36 minutes: (I'll let you crank that up on your spreadsheet)

  22. #297
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628
    I'll say again (oh, and Splitter also had a higher WS/48 in the 2014 playoffs than Kiwi, tard. The stat you insist on using ).

    Anyhow, let's review all the facts.

    Statistical facts:

    WS:

    Jordan '91: 0.282 per game
    Lebron '12: 0.252 per game
    Duncan '03: 0.245 per gam3
    Bird '86: 0.233 per game
    Shaq '01: 0.231 per game
    Lebron '13: 0.226 per game
    Kobe '01: 0.223 per game
    Lebron '16: 0.223 per game
    Kareem '80: 0.22 per game
    Duncan '99: 0.217 per game
    Wade '06: 0.208 per game
    Magic '87: 0.205 per game
    Bird '84: 0.2043 per game
    Kiwi '19 0.2041 per game

    Kiwi ranks 14th since the merger

    BPM:



    Again, 14th since the merger

    PER:



    8th since the merger

    On/off (the best stat in the bunch):

    Shaq, '02: +22.9
    Duncan, '03: +23.1
    Wade, '06: +22.2
    Lebron, '12: +24.3
    Lebron, '16: +21.1
    Curry, 17: +20.6
    Garnett, '08: +19.8
    Dirk, '11: +16.8
    Kawhi, '19: 15.9

    9th since '01. So it stands to reason if on/off was recorded pre-01, he'd fall 5 to 10 places (also note, Draymond Green has higher on/offs than Kiwi, as well).

    Contextual facts.

    Despite Kawhitstorm's spinning, Kiwi had plenty of help, no more or no less than any other title team has contributed in aiding their superstar centerpiece. The much maligned "Fat Lowry" had a stellar +12.8 on/off which was higher than any of Kevin Durant's with the Warriors. So I don't want to hear any shit about as if it were just him and Smush Parker out there.

    Every all-time great title run is capped off with dominating Finals closeout/back to the wall games. Okay, Kiwi shit himself in game 5. Time to step up in game 6 and drop 40. Nope. Kyle Lowry and Siakam were the Rap's two best players in game 6, and Andre Igoudala outscored him in the closeout game. I'll say it for the 600th time. "All time great" runs don't fizzle out like that, with the centerpiece player playing subpar in two consecutive closeout games. He's was also bad in game 1. And the most important fact is the Warriors were down KD for all but 10 minutes of the series and then lost a scorching Klay Thompson in game 6. Injuries are part of the game, but the Warriors injury badluck was unprecedented.

    Kawhitstorm can for the final reply. There's no more argument to made other than qualitative "well, x player had more help, faced worse teams, etc, etc."

    Note: Those stats were filtered using your retarded parameters, too, and Kiwi still doesn't rank top 5 in any of them
    Last edited by midnightpulp; 06-17-2019 at 07:53 AM.

  23. #298
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    You're the dumbshit that insisted on using WS/48.
    LooooooooooooooL, Skip has his panties in bunches b/c he pushed himself into a corner

    Now that we removed the arbitrary parameters you used to filter out players who would rank ahead of Kiwi
    It's called filtering out noise dumbass, if I had used Kawhi's stats RATHER than '03 Timmay & '95 Hakeem (the ALL-TIME runs you HANDPICKED) as the baseline then you would have a point


    (fun fact: you can impact a game in other ways aside from scoring/efficiency), we see the flaw of the stat, don't we?
    Yeah, it's called playing defense & being a COMPLETE 2-way player....just ask Giannis.
    '15 + '16 Curry had all the gravity in the world but his on/off pre-Snake was inferior to '01 + '02 Kirby

    Furthermore, Jason Richardson was on fire for that run. 19.8 ppg on .636 TS (higher than Kiwi's), so of course he's going to have impact, retard.
    Except for the fact Kiwi has the highest TS for any that averaged 30 during a championship run.......*sips tea*
    Last edited by Kawhitstorm; 06-17-2019 at 08:00 AM.

  24. #299
    Believe. Kawhitstorm's Avatar
    My Team
    Toronto Raptors
    Post Count
    16,804
    I'll say again (oh, and Splitter also had a higher WS/48 in the 2014 playoffs than Kiwi, tard. The stat you insist on using ).

    Anyhow, let's review all the facts.

    Statistical facts:

    WS:

    Jordan '91: 0.282 per game
    Lebron '12: 0.252 per game
    Duncan '03: 0.245 per gam3
    Bird '86: 0.233 per game
    Shaq '01: 0.231 per game
    Lebron '13: 0.226 per game
    Kobe '01: 0.223 per game
    Lebron '16: 0.223 per game
    Kareem '80: 0.22 per game
    Duncan '99: 0.217 per game
    Wade '06: 0.208 per game
    Magic '87: 0.205 per game
    Bird '84: 0.2043 per game
    Kiwi '19 0.2041 per game

    Kiwi ranks 14th since the merger

    BPM:



    Again, 14th since the merger

    PER:



    8th since the merger

    On/off (the best stat in the bunch):

    Shaq, '02: +22.9
    Duncan, '03: +23.1
    Wade, '06: +22.2
    Lebron, '12: +24.3
    Lebron, '16: +21.1
    Curry, 17: +20.6
    Garnett, '08: +19.8
    Dirk, '11: +16.8
    Kawhi, '19: 15.9

    9th since '01. So it stands to reason if on/off was recorded pre-01, he'd fall 5 to 10 places (also note, Draymond Green has higher on/offs than Kiwi, as well).

    Contextual facts.

    Despite Kawhitstorm's spinning, Kiwi had plenty of help, no more or no less than any other title team has contributed in aiding their superstar centerpiece. The much maligned "Fat Lowry" had a stellar +12.8 on/off which was higher than any of Kevin Durant's with the Warriors. So I don't want to hear any shit about as if it were just him and Smush Parker out there.

    Every all-time great title run is capped off with dominating Finals closeout/back to the wall games. Okay, Kiwi shit himself in game 5. Time to step up in game 6 and drop 40. Nope. Kyle Lowry and Siakam were the Rap's two best players in game 6, and Andre Igoudala outscored him in the closeout game. I'll say it for the 600th time. "All time great" runs don't fizzle out like that, with the centerpiece player playing subpar in two consecutive closeout games. He's was also bad in game 1. And the most important fact is the Warriors were down KD for all but 10 minutes of the series and then lost a scorching Klay Thompson in game 6. Injuries are part of the game, but the Warriors injury badluck was unprecedented.

    Kawhitstorm can for the final reply. There's no more argument to made other than qualitative "well, x player had more help, faced worse teams, etc, etc."

    Note: Those stats were filtered using your retarded parameters, too, and Kiwi still doesn't rank top 5 in any of them
    https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...=1#post9841687

  25. #300
    SeaGOAT midnightpulp's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    24,628


    It's called filtering out noise dumbass, if I had used Kawhi's stats RATHER than '03 Timmay & '95 Hakeem (the ALL-TIME runs you HANDPICKED) as the baseline then you would have a point
    Yeah, your "filtering out noise" filtered out Jordan's second 3 peat runs . Are you this retarded? Serious question?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •