What's new
By:
Filters

Offensive Suck Per 48

bordelais7

bordelais7

♫
Contributor
We begin with Missed Shots per 48 Minutes (or Chuck/48).

Al Jefferson 17.45
Alec Burks 16.00
C.J. Miles 14.77
Josh Howard 13.71
Enes Kanter 13.71
Paul Millsap 10.78
Derrick Favors 8.23
Devin Harris 8.17
Gordon Hayward 7.53
Raja Bell 6.55
Earl Watson 5.19
Jeremy Evans 0.00
Jamaal Tinsley 0.00

Team Player Ave. 10.22

Perhaps those clamoring for more Burks have merely grown tired of the old flavor of "chuck suck". I fully expect the trend to continue, and wish to be the first to anoint him "Chucker, Jr."

I also expect Chucker, Sr. to make up some ground and pass up his protégé as well as the Black (not racist) Hole in the standings.


Next, we add in Free Throw Misses Per 48 Minutes (or Seriously?/48)

C.J. Miles 4.92
Enes Kanter 2.74
Derrick Favors 2.74
Paul Millsap 1.96
Devin Harris 1.02
Gordon Hayward 0.94
Al Jefferson 0.87
Alec Burks 0.00
Josh Howard 0.00
Raja Bell 0.00
Earl Watson 0.00
Jeremy Evans 0.00
Jamaal Tinsley 0.00

Team Player Ave. 1.30

To be fair, the Jazz have run into a couple of teams who have historically been great free throw defenders.


Finally, we add in a pinch of Turnovers Per 48 (Mmmmm....turnovers)

Earl Watson 9.08
Jamaal Tinsley 8.00
Derrick Favors 5.49
C.J. Miles 3.69
Al Jefferson 3.49
Alec Burks 3.20
Devin Harris 3.06
Josh Howard 2.29
Raja Bell 2.18
Paul Millsap 1.96
Gordon Hayward 1.88
Enes Kanter 0.00
Jeremy Evans 0.00


Now, we combine them all together with a magical formula, and...voilà! Suck Per 48!

C.J. Miles 23.38
Al Jefferson 21.82
Alec Burks 19.20
Derrick Favors 16.46
Enes Kanter 16.46
Josh Howard 16.00
Paul Millsap 14.69
Earl Watson 14.27
Devin Harris 12.26
Gordon Hayward 10.35
Raja Bell 8.73
Jamaal Tinsley 8.00
Jeremy Evans 0.00


I hope you find this as useful as I do.
 
Before I know what to really make of this I would need to know a NBA average and what not. What number would be acceptable? 5.5? 10.0? 15.75?

Also this screams useless stat to me in the fact that Raja is is so low on the Suck per 48. But that is probably because he does nothing on the court but take up space.
 
Looks like the key to success is staying on the bench. Maybe bring Boozer back. He loved sitting on the bench... or rather, behind it.

Your best point was the one about the free throw defenses we've faced.
 
Yeah this is missing the same thing all stats are missing, the intangible suck.

It does make a case for Hayward, and tell us a lot about CJ. A lot that we already knew.


To quote Bart Simpson:

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.
Click to expand...
 
Alec Burks is shooting 55% FGs (100% FTs) -- here's to hoping he continues to "chuck". Is it even possible to be a chucker if you shoot 55%? Chucking, by implication, is a negative thing, IMO. If you're a SG shooting 55%, that has to be a good thing - I think.

Makes me wonder what Burks made shots per 48 is and how that compares with his teammates.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
^^Dude, what the hell is wrong with you? We're trying to focus on the negative here. Pay attention!
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't disagree - I'm all for highlighting the negative and I appreciate Bordy's effort (as always), but but I'm not sure missed shots per 48 is helpful if you don't combine it somehow with a made shots per 48. That, and I'm a bonafide Burks apologist (long time JFers are surely shocked to know this).

Carry on, fellas.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
^^Dude, what the hell is wrong with you? We're trying to focus on the negative here. Pay attention!
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was going to say.

Try to follow me here. A player can be efficient, talented, and a great teammate and still produce plenty of suck-worthy moments. If I start throwing in useless stats like "made shots", well...it's a slippery slope. Soon I'm adding assists and rebounds, and this whole thing eventually becomes another version of PER. And who wants that?
 
Although, in seriousness, I think Burks is going to be horrible. And the fact that SJF is a backer increases my odds of being correct. No offense, SJF.
 
bordelais7 said:
While your criticism is appreciated, the playing time factor is completely untrue. Everyone on the team gets the exact same amount of per48 time.
Click to expand...

Not entirely accurate. 1 rebound in 1 minute of playing time per game (48 Rp48) is hardly equivalent to 48 rebounds in 48 minutes of playing time per game (48 Rp48). Or even 24 in 24 minutes (48 Rp48). Hell I am willing to bet that no one would argue that the 1 reb for 1 minute player is a better option than a guy averaging 12 rpg in 30 minutes per game (19.2 Rp48).
 
LogGrad98 said:
Not entirely accurate. 1 rebound in 1 minute of playing time per game (48 Rp48) is hardly equivalent to 48 rebounds in 48 minutes of playing time per game (48 Rp48). Or even 24 in 24 minutes (48 Rp48). Hell I am willing to bet that no one would argue that the 1 reb for 1 minute player is a better option than a guy averaging 12 rpg in 30 minutes per game (19.2 Rp48).
Click to expand...

So are you saying that players who play less minutes somehow do better within those limited minutes because they're playing less? Or are you simply saying that the sample size is currently limited?

If it's the latter, I agree -- although they would have just as much opportunity to have over-inflated suck as they would under-inflated suck (for example, Tinsley leads the team in AST/48 by quite a wide margin). So the premise that playing limited minutes gives an advantage in the suck rankings is false.
 
bordelais7 said:
So are you saying that players who play less minutes somehow do better within those limited minutes because they're playing less? Or are you simply saying that the sample size is currently limited?

If it's the latter, I agree -- although they would have just as much opportunity to have over-inflated suck as they would under-inflated suck (for example, Tinsley leads the team in AST/48 by quite a wide margin). So the premise that playing limited minutes gives an advantage in the suck rankings is false.
Click to expand...

Both. If you are a player who likely will be fairly solid in the NBA, but your PT is limited due to playing behind vets or simply being a rookie (Burks, for example) then it will tend to give you a better shot to shine in terms of numbers when the bulk of your minutes come against the other teams' scrubs in blow-outs. But generally players who play less minutes have anything they do exaggerated beyond meaning in a per48 stat, and sheer luck can result in crazy numbers. Also, playing limited minutes will tend to push performance to one end of the spectrum or the other, further inflating or deflating the per48 stat. That is why the NBA on their stats pages have the required minutes played and other limiters to see who really is performing and who is showing inflated numbers due to limited minutes.

That is why it is inaccurate to say that every player gets the same amount of per48 time, since every minute actually played is not of equal value to every other minute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top