What's new
By:

Rudy Gobert - 2015/2016 Defensive Player Of The Year Push

Hack said:
If we were to build teams to face off against each other and I got to choose my players just by watching them and not looking at stats, while you got to pick your player's strictly from just the stats without watching them, then I guarantee I could easily assemble a better team than you could. If you were relying solely on the analytics
Click to expand...

I agree that gobert should obviously be ranked ahead of zeller in defense but as far as picking a team relying only on analytics goes, I'm pretty sure you would end up with a pretty dope *** team doing it that way

I have a feeling that players like lebron, harden, curry, westbrook, etc have really good player efficiency ratings
 
If you had to build a team without looking at stats it would take a long *** time to watch every player in the NBA enough to get a good feel for how good they actually are to be able to build a team.

I would much rather build a team off stat sheets than just watching. It would take way too long and not be very accurate.

The argument is dumb though because an all or nothing approach either way isn't the way to go.
 
fishonjazz said:
I agree that gobert should obviously be ranked ahead of zeller in defense but as far as picking a team relying only on analytics goes, I'm pretty sure you would end up with a pretty dope *** team doing it that way

I have a feeling that players like lebron, harden, curry, westbrook, etc have really good player efficiency ratings
Click to expand...

Cy said:
If you had to build a team without looking at stats it would take a long *** time to watch every player in the NBA enough to get a good feel for how good they actually are to be able to build a team.

I would much rather build a team off stat sheets than just watching. It would take way too long and not be very accurate.

The argument is dumb though because an all or nothing approach either way isn't the way to go.
Click to expand...

But which way is more likely to misguided you?

I would pick Lebron and Curry without ever looking at the stat sheet. I wouldn't pick Zeller, or I wouldn't pick someone like Al Jefferson. But if you are relying heavily on the analytics then you could easily make the mistake of picking one of those scrubs, or some scrub off of the 76ers or something. Who are mostly just looters in a riot.

I agree you wouldn't use just one. But the eye test has to be the first and last factor you go off of. Only using analytics to double check what you think you are seeing.
 
Trust the tape. It doesn't lie. The best scouts still use their eyes to tell them if a player can play or not. Stats and analytics can help identify strengths and weaknesses, while measurables and workouts can give you an indication of how well a player will make the jump from college to pros. . . but I've always felt that their tape is the BEST indicator of future success.
 
Hack said:
I don't believe in relying on stats to indicate who is good and who isnt. There are just too many factors that go into why the stat may read the way it does.

If Cody Zeller and Andre Roberson are ranked ahead of Gobert then something has to be wrong with the indicator.

If we were to build teams to face off against each other and I got to choose my players just by watching them and not looking at stats, while you got to pick your player's strictly from just the stats without watching them, then I guarantee I could easily assemble a better team than you could. If you were relying solely on the analytics


Seriously. If you want to build defense, are you going to pick Cody Zeller or Rudy Gobert?
Click to expand...

-----------------

That would be a good argument if someone were advocating that you close your eyes and use stats only. But since no one is saying that your point is hard to find. Any serious NBA mind understands that each stat has limits and to use it blindly is utterly stupid. Not just basketball.

-------------------

Enlightened minds use stats to build off of their natural insights, not to replace them as you suggest. So in this case, is one believes Zeller he sucks on D, you may want to go back and test and reconsider your belief. He may not be at the top, but this stat is probably telling you something -- at least directionally.

-----------------------

When you pose a simplistic either A (watch games) or B (look at stats), this is a false choice and one that no serious person would consider.

And to your question: seriously would I choose Zeller over Gobert? I reply, "durrrr, yup, because that is what the numbers say and I refuse to think about anything but the numbers" (sarcasm)

---------------------


Finally, you did not answer my question: is there a better stat that is an overall indicator of defensive prowess? Because unless you do advocate using NO defensive stats, then I assume you must look at SOME defensive stats. tick tock.
 
Jazz have held 11 of their last 15 opponents to 85 points or less.

Only the Bucks have done so as many times all season (16 times).

Per Utah Jazz Twitter.
 
silesian said:
-----------------

That would be a good argument if someone were advocating that you close your eyes and use stats only. But since no one is saying that your point is hard to find. Any serious NBA mind understands that each stat has limits and to use it blindly is utterly stupid. Not just basketball.

-------------------

Enlightened minds use stats to build off of their natural insights, not to replace them as you suggest. So in this case, is one believes Zeller he sucks on D, you may want to go back and test and reconsider your belief. He may not be at the top, but this stat is probably telling you something -- at least directionally.

-----------------------

When you pose a simplistic either A (watch games) or B (look at stats), this is a false choice and one that no serious person would consider.

And to your question: seriously would I choose Zeller over Gobert? I reply, "durrrr, yup, because that is what the numbers say and I refuse to think about anything but the numbers" (sarcasm)

---------------------


Finally, you did not answer my question: is there a better stat that is an overall indicator of defensive prowess? Because unless you do advocate using NO defensive stats, then I assume you must look at SOME defensive stats. tick tock.
Click to expand...

There isn't one defensive statistic that will tell you defensive prowess. In fact, the best defense doesn't even show up in the stat column. And that's essentially being able to stay in front of your man, and challenge shots. If you try to use any stat to qualify a defensive statistic such as defensive real plus minus, then it can be easily skewed depending on who your teammates are, what schemes you are running, how good your offense is, etc...


All I said was that list sucked. Which it did. It indicated that Zeller is a better defender than Gobert. It also indicated that Gobert was at the bottom of that list, when in fact, he quite possibly could be the best defender in the entire league. I believe he is.

So did that list do us any good to look at it? Probably not.
 
Last edited:
Hack said:
There isn't one defensive statistic that will tell you defensive prowess. In fact, the best defense doesn't even show up in the stat column. And that's essentially being able to stay in front of your man,
Click to expand...

They actually do have metrics to examine how strong a player is at staying in front of their man. It's called "keep in front percent" - and Dante has been in the top 4 of all guards (SGs and PGs) for the past month.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top