Hardy Says Keyonte Has a Chance to be a Star

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Interestingly, you did not have this "plenty of context" when commenting on another rookie who had a bad shooting season on a team putting out an unusually bad product, Scoot Henderson. You were consistently pretty hard on him.

Scoot Henderson had two years experience playing the PG position at a professional level with NBA rules....

 

[Fosto]

True but guys like Iverson, Rodman, Cousins, etc. had the talent to get away with it, not sure Keyonte does.

That's they key detail here. You can't be as bad as Keyonte was and still act like you're some big deal.

 

[fishonjazz]

You are so funny, like I'm not really sure if you really don't get it or not.

EFG% isn't some black box stat, it's an equation. Part of the equation is the same as fg%, so of course they are highly correlated.

(EFG% = (fgm + 0.53PM) / FGA)

Exactly what I said in multiple posts. I literally posted that field goal percentage is not the only thing that determines efficiency. Just one indicator. I literally posted that they are related. Turns out they were/are.
I posted how efficiency and shooting (field goal% which includes 2pt% and 3 point%) can often be interchangeable terms (though not always. There are exceptions)

Ya i never got all the fuss. I simply said that keyontes poor shooting is no bueno which led to a huge discussion about nothing really. EFG is a better stat to show shooting efficiency. But field goal percentage is also a stat to show shooting efficiency. Was never a big deal to me.
I used fg% to show that KEYONTE (not another player) is an inefficient shooter. People be like you cant use fg% to show that keyonte is an inefficient shooter you have to use EFG. So I use EFG to show the exact same thing that the FG% showed. Eh, whatevers. Both stats show the thing that I want them to show to illustrate the point i was making. (keyonte was/is a bad inefficient shooter)

 

[KqWIN]

True but guys like Iverson, Rodman, Cousins, etc. had the talent to get away with it, not sure Keyonte does.

Key's attitude is almost always mentioned in a positive light. He's competive, plays with fire, talks a lot of trash ect....I'm more with you that his attitude/mentality is actually a concern. I think Key is competitive, but how does he see himself competing? Right now, and probably for his whole life, it's been by scoring on the other team. That's how he sees himself beating the other team. I don't think that's necessarily bad, but I don't think he's demonstrated the competitiveness that leads to him doing anything to win. Mamba mentality is a great brand....Tim Duncan mentality is probably what young players should aspire to have.

I think the intersection of both Key's and Hardy's disinterest in defense is a real concern.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

Exactly what I said in multiple posts. I literally posted that field goal percentage is not the only thing that determines efficiency. Just one indicator. I literally posted that they are related. Turns out they were/are.
I posted how efficiency and shooting (field goal% which includes 2pt% and 3 point%) can often be interchangeable terms (though not always. There are exceptions)

Ya i never got all the fuss. I simply said that keyontes poor shooting is no bueno which led to a huge discussion about nothing really. EFG is a better stat to show shooting efficiency. But field goal percentage is also a stat to show shooting efficiency. Was never a big deal to me.
I used fg% to show that KEYONTE (not another player) is an inefficient shooter. People be like you cant use fg% to show that keyonte is an inefficient shooter you have to use EFG. So I use EFG to show the exact same thing that the FG% showed. Eh, whatevers. Both stats show the thing that I want them to show to illustrate the point i was making. (keyonte was/is a bad inefficient shooter)

When you say someone is inefficient, you are making a comparison vs what you think is efficient. Even though in the case of Keyonte fg% and efg% matches up, it won't in every case, so why not just use the metric that tells the more complete story?

It's only a big deal in the sense that you spend so much of your time talking about basketball that it's surprising you would use fg% to describe efficiency. It also becomes a big fuss when you try and justify using fg% despite our attempts to help you understand.

It's like saying I'm going to use my odometer to tell you how fast I'm going. Sure miles driven is part of the equation, but it only really makes sense to talk about mph.

 

[jazznik]

Mamba mentality is a great brand....Tim Duncan mentality is probably what young players should aspire to have.

I think the intersection of both Key's and Hardy's disinterest in defense is a real concern.

There is nothing wrong about the Mamba mentality. Kobe has not been only obsessed with scoring, he was driving himself and teammates hard to improve in all facets of the game. He also pushed himself to become a great defender, free-throw shooter and rebounder, he was a totally elite passer for a SG, practiced hard, competed hard, was a strong leader... Kobe is a great role model for any young guard.

 

[KqWIN]

When you say someone is inefficient, you are making a comparison vs what you think is efficient. Even though in the case of Keyonte fg% and efg% matches up, it won't in every case, so why not just use the metric that tells the more complete story?

It's only a big deal in the sense that you spend so much of your time talking about basketball that it's surprising you would use fg% to describe efficiency. It also becomes a big fuss when you try and justify using fg% despite our attempts to help you understand.

It's like saying I'm going to use my odometer to tell you how fast I'm going. Sure miles driven is part of the equation, but it only really makes sense to talk about mph.

I think Key’s efficiency is a concern, but these arguments about FG% and/or comparing his efficiency against players in completely different roles really cheapen the argument.

 

[fishonjazz]

When you say someone is inefficient, you are making a comparison vs what you think is efficient. Even though in the case of Keyonte fg% and efg% matches up, it won't in every case, so why not just use the metric that tells the more complete story?

It's only a big deal in the sense that you spend so much of your time talking about basketball that it's surprising you would use fg% to describe efficiency. It also becomes a big fuss when you try and justify using fg% despite our attempts to help you understand.

It's like saying I'm going to use my odometer to tell you how fast I'm going. Sure miles driven is part of the equation, but it only really makes sense to talk about mph.

Eh if I ever see that someone is shooting 39% from the field for a season then I know that player just had an inefficient season.

I can look at the efg as well to show me that the player was inefficient but I don't need to.

The mph things isn't true though. I have never seen miles driven to tell speed. I have seen field goal percentage used a million times to describe whether someone is playing efficiently or not.

Anyway, you could have seen me post that keyonte is inefficient and simply left it alone or agreed (as I'm sure you do)
Then when I used his 39% field goal percentage and his 37% college field goal percentage to add an indicator showing his inefficiency you could have left it alone or agreed (I'm sure you understand that those field goal percentages almost always, or maybe even 100% of the time, equal poor efg) but you chose to make a big fuss. Despite the multiple times of saying "I'm not trying to be a dick" (which usually means you realize you might be acting like a dick) and then acting condescending to me over and over again I just kept trying to explain myself without insult.

Maybe you could have been the problem in this situation?

Maybe next time I talk about statistics I should @ you to make sure I'm using the correct stats that you prefer in the correct way. Or you could just look at the point I'm making with the stats I'm using and see if you think it's an accurate point. If it is (like in this case) just accept that I didn't make my point the way you would and see that the point made was sound.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I don’t know WTH you idiots are arguing. He’s effing good. We got a steal at 16

 

[KqWIN]

@fishonjazz Defending his right to be stupid to the death lol

 

[SoberasHotRod]

Eh if I ever see that someone is shooting 39% from the field for a season then I know that player just had an inefficient season.

I can look at the efg as well to show me that the player was inefficient but I don't need to.

The mph things isn't true though. I have never seen miles driven to tell speed. I have seen field goal percentage used a million times to describe whether someone is playing efficiently or not.

Anyway, you could have seen me post that keyonte is inefficient and simply left it alone or agreed (as I'm sure you do)
Then when I used his 39% field goal percentage and his 37% college field goal percentage to add an indicator showing his inefficiency you could have left it alone or agreed (I'm sure you understand that those field goal percentages almost always, or maybe even 100% of the time, equal poor efg) but you chose to make a big fuss. Despite the multiple times of saying "I'm not trying to be a dick" (which usually means you realize you might be acting like a dick) and then acting condescending to me over and over again I just kept trying to explain myself without insult.

Maybe you could have been the problem in this situation?

Maybe next time I talk about statistics I should @ you to make sure I'm using the correct stats that you prefer in the correct way. Or you could just look at the point I'm making with the stats I'm using and see if you think it's an accurate point. If it is (like in this case) just accept that I didn't make my point the way you would and see that the point made was sound.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

Quintuppling down. Your stamina for refusing to try and understand something is impressive. FWIW, when I first engaged with you, I really wasn't trying to be a Dick. I figured you just didn't realize. I thought I could help you understand if you didn't know what the difference was. Now I'm not sure what this is, but let my try and explain again.

If someone has a 39% fg% you can only guess they are inefficient, you can't know. It would only take them making 56% of their makes as 3s to have an efg% of 50% or higher. 56% isn't some crazy number that would never happen. There were 70 NBA players that had 56% or higher of their attempts from 3. On the extreme end is Sam Merrill who shoots 90% of his attempts from 3. He only has a 40% fg%, but an elite efg%.

Why use a metric where you have to assume, when you can easily use a metric that let's you know?

Look, I was honestly trying to be helpful and then I did get condescending, so I apologize. I'm trying to be helpful again. You can keep talking about basketball and use fg% to describe efficiency and people will continue to think you are dumb. I don't think you are dumb, I just think you are stubborn. So, do with this information what you will.

(Just in case you are curious how I came up with 56% of makes from 3. 39 + 11 = 50. 11÷.5 = 22. 22/39 = 56%.)

 

[fishonjazz]

Quintuppling down. Your stamina for refusing to try and understand something is impressive. FWIW, when I first engaged with you, I really wasn't trying to be a Dick. I figured you just didn't realize. I thought I could help you understand if you didn't know what the difference was. Now I'm not sure what this is, but let my try and explain again.

If someone has a 39% fg% you can only guess they are inefficient, you can't know. It would only take them making 56% of their makes as 3s to have an efg% of 50% or higher. 56% isn't some crazy number that would never happen. There were 70 NBA players that had 56% or higher of their attempts from 3. On the extreme end is Sam Merrill who shoots 90% of his attempts from 3. He only has a 40% fg%, but an elite efg%.

Why use a metric where you have to assume, when you can easily use a metric that let's you know?

Look, I was honestly trying to be helpful and then I did get condescending, so I apologize. I'm trying to be helpful again. You can keep talking about basketball and use fg% to describe efficiency and people will continue to think you are dumb. I don't think you are dumb, I just think you are stubborn. So, do with this information what you will.

(Just in case you are curious how I came up with 56% of makes from 3. 39 + 11 = 50. 11÷.5 = 22. 22/39 = 56%.)

First. I have said multiple times that I understand what efg is. I do. Also said it's a better indicator of efficiency. (Showing just how stubborn I am right?)

Second. I literally can look at the 39 field percentage and know that keyonte George (the player in question here) is inefficient. I know he isn't a sharpshooter from 3. Maybe you can't but I can.

Kudos on the sam Merrill example. Field goal percentage wouldn't work on him like it does keyonte (I also mentioned in many posts that there are exceptions to field goal percentage being a good indicator for efficiency). For keyonte it works wonderfully as he is basically the exact same inefficient whether using field goal percentage or efg (as I showed with his NBA rankings in each.)

3rd. Field goal percentage is a stat I and many others have been posting on this website and websites all over the Internet for years when talking about efficiency. In fact I can almost guarantee you that in the very next jazz game you watch there will be a graphic posted at halftime comparing the jazz and their opponents stats and one of the stats will be field goal percentage.

You and kqwin act as if I'm the first and only person to use fg% as a stat and that's it's completely worthless. Tell it to basketball reference and every other website that tracks stats.



Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk