Mobley's FG% since Jan 15

Pole. Your observations and calculations are correct. I think some of the other posters are missing the point. I would suspect that the Rockets use calculations like yours to determine the true value of a player rather than the "canned" NBA provided percentages. Everyone ragged on the Rockets for running the Post-up play the vast majority of the time but, according to Rudy it was the highest successful percentage play. He didn't mean that they made the shot the most. He meant that they either made the shot and got FTs or they got FTs. They also factored in the affect that the fouls that were made, had on the other team. It's NOT all black and white.

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


[This message has been edited by OT (edited April 17, 2000).]

 

What is it they say? Defense wins championships.

WON LOSS RECORD BOYS...that is all that counts.

DaDakota

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

 

DaDakota
Pole wasn't talking about wins and losses. He is talking about Cat's percentages.

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

 

of course, imagine what mobley's point per shot average would be if he shot a higher percentage....

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

 

My Point exactly OT, all this is meaningless dribble.

No offense.

DaDakota

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

 

Mobley's shooting percentage has gone up since Jan 15th. Amazingly so has his Points per game. Maybe that is the best way to judge someones offense- by points per game.......Nah, that is just too obvious.


ROckS


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

 

I know, more yada, yada, yada, but I have to come to the defense of those supporting the use of offensive statistics.

It is true these stats don't tell you much about defense, defensive performance is much harder to quantify at the level of the individual players. Blocks and steals, with or without ratios with foul committed or adjustments per minute, give you some idea of individual defense, but they are very limited. Still, they can give you clues to players performance.

But offensive stats like FG%, or even more like Pole's point per shot, are more useful toward quantifying players performance. Limited, yes, but useful. Just to show how stats can be useful and pretty accurate, take the top 5 guys based on ESPN's composite rating of individual stats (mostly offensive #’s). They are--Oneal=38.2, Payton = 34.9, KG 33.2, Webber 31.9, and Kidd 31.6. If you think of the 391 total players are rated, this stat did a pretty good job of identifying the best 5 players that any reasonable person would subjectively come up with. Yes, you might say Duncan should have been there, or Malone, or Hill (who BTW were 6,7,8)--but that is some mighty good prediction from this statistic in terms of identifying individual players worth to their teams. If the stats were not telling a important story and were useless, the odds that the these 5 elite players would be identified in the rating by chance alone would be astronomical.

But just like a good doctor or a good loan officer or a good mutual fund manager, you use statistics along with experience and good judgement to make decisions or judge a course of action when a person or organism is involved (treating an illness, determining the value of a player or stock). You should consider context along with the statistics. In judging a basketball player, you have to consider the quality of teammates, opponents, system and perhaps most importantly the role of the player (e.g., create offense, or simply wait for an open shot). For instance, in my opinion Bonzi Wells (who benefits from others ignoring him on the offensive end to help against his teammates) is maybe 1/4 the player Mobley or M. Dickerson is, but you would only know this if they switched teams and roles (Wells has better #’s per minute). A final point that should be considered about stats is that players aren't stagnant. All we have to look at to see this is think about Dickerson’s or Webber’s free throw shooting this year (both have improved like 20%--huge amounts). Even the one stat where context is least important can change quite a bit for one reason or another, thus potential performance is not always revealed in stats. That's again where the experience and intuitive judgement of a good decision maker is so important in determining players worth or any other human enterprise. But don't think the best people at this are not using stats to help them with their decision making.


[This message has been edited by sir scarvajal (edited April 17, 2000).]

 

Doesn't matter.



------------------
<this space for rent>

 

Not a problem. I wasn't offended.

The points per shot attempt is an old stat that's been used as an efficiency rating for players for a long time. It has evolved into stats like "Points Created" which often includes assists. I really have nothing against it. I just was pointing out that Player A does exist in the NBA since you seemed to be saying he didn't.

Regarding Mobley, your comment,

Don't put to much stock in FG%; it's one stat that leaves quite a bit to be desired in judging ones scoring ability.

is the reason I brought up "arguing" whether even points/shot attempt is a great stat to look at when judging scoring ability. I agree that it's better than pure FG% (at least it seemst that way), but when Moochie and Shandon are giving Jordan a run for his money based on that stat, I just disagreed. I could be right, I could be wrong. It's part of the equation (pun intended) just as FG% is. Neither is the ultimate barometer of scoring ability.

Regarding Mobley not scoring that much more per shot attempt. According to HeyP he's scoring 1.32 points per shot since January. His total for the year is 1.24. This means that he was probably around 1.18 - 1.20 before his current streak of good FG shooting (that's just a wild stab; if somebody can get a better/more accurate number, fire away). That's a about a 9-12% change. To me, that's a fairly big change, no? Of course, I guesstimated his numbers before January. HeyP, think you could get his points per shot attempt before January?

------------------
<this space for rent>

[This message has been edited by Dr of Dunk (edited April 17, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Dr of Dunk (edited April 17, 2000).]

 

Here's one for the point-per-shotists:

Gimme a list of the top 20 scoring players in NBA history, and I bet you won't find too many with low FG%.

Now, gimme a list of any scrubs, or players in the CBA. I bet you won't find very many with high FG%.
(Let me modify that by adding: I bet I can name more low FG shooting scrubs than you can name high FG shooting scrubs.)


------------------
I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.

[This message has been edited by DREAMer (edited April 17, 2000).]

 

At the risk of throwing Pole's thread off, lol (j/k Pole, I've got nothin' but respect for ya, just don't hurt me):

Jordan's #'s for the past few years. Pts/shot attempt and FG % :

97-98 1.245 46.5%
96-97 1.284 48.6%
95-96 1.346 49.5%
94-95 1.131 41.1% (short season)
92-93 1.269 49.5%
91-92 1.322 51.9%
90-91 1.404 53.9% (more like it, eh?)
89-90 1.402 52.6%
88-89 1.467 53.8% (woo!)

Hmmm... guess he dunked more early in his career, huh?

------------------
&lt;this space for rent&gt;

 

Woo, I oughta play the lottery. My wild stab at 1.18-1.20 was on the money. If he was 1.175 before and 1.314 after, then that's a change of about 12%.

Anyway... this has been fun. I wonder what other players' pts/shot are? Anyone interested or have we thoroughly beaten this to death? I can see Pole cringing.

------------------
&lt;this space for rent&gt;

 

I know it's an already-used stat, but howzabout we dub this the Pole Ratio for the sake of the BBS?

I've gone completely crazy with this, so forgive me DaDakota (and where the hell do I buy Starlancer? Can't find the thing anywhere).

Using 2-day old stats, I found the top Pole Ratio players. Of players that have attempted 300 field goals, here are the top players, their Pole Ratios, and their FG % :

Dikembe Mutombo : 1.661 56.3%
Jerome Williams : 1.512 56.8%
Alonzo Mourning : 1.458 55.2%
Anthony Mason : 1.445 47.8%
Charles Outlaw : 1.444 60.1% (dunky dunk)
Ruben Patterson : 1.434 53.6%
Jon Barry : 1.429 46.1%
Karl Malone : 1.422 51.1%
Shaquille O'Neal: 1.407 57.4%
Reggie Miller : 1.402 44.3%
Kelvin Cato : 1.395 53.2%

------------------
&lt;this space for rent&gt;