If Lillian shot his 3pts (1-8) like tonight against us, we most likely had won the game against Portland. Aruba would prolly won't be so sure about Lillian's potential after just 3 games. But I respect Aruba's honestly assessment based on his eye-test.
This. TS% is FAR more meaningful as what counts is the number of points earned vs actual shots attempted combined with the ability to draw fouls and sink free throws. 2011/12 Tony Parker - 53.9 TS% Rajon Rondo - 48.3 TS% Jeremy Lin - 55.2 TS% 2012/13 Jeremy Lin - 49.7 TS% Even with Lin's WORSE shooting over the first 3 games (small sample size), he still exceeds Rajon Rondo's 2011/12 numbers and Rajon Rondo's CAREER TS% (.489). Even eFG% is a misleading stat. While it does tell you the rate of baskets sunk taking into account a weighting for 3 point shooting, it does NOT take into account Free Throws, which in essence are incompleted shots that WOULD have generated a basket and presumably points. For example, if I know Dwight is going to sink 15 dunks and foul him on 10/15 plays, but he shoots 2/5 on the actual shots he manages to attempt, does that mean his 40% shooting is representative of his offensive impact on the scoreboard? FG% is a very limited and flawed stat when looking at a player's true offensive scoring impact per possession.
The question is then, why should the Rocket's deficiencies in shootingbe placed on Lin's shoulders? I mean you just said Asik can't score, pf is in flux and sf can't shoot. Perhaps we need upgrades in those areas instead/as well? I mean if Lin scores 20 and shoots 40% from 3 and 50% overall, and his assists, rebounding and steals numbers stay the home, we ain't getting him at $8m/yr. We laugh at T-Mac for saying "it's on me", but we say to Jeremy Lin "it's on you".
Another interesting side effect is it also further enhances the argument that the decision of Lin to double Aldrich over staying on Lillard was the correct decision. Lillard's 3 point shooting game by game... LAL - 1/4 OKC - 2/6 Rockets - 3/6 Dallas - 1/8 Total - 7/24 (29.16%) In other words, Lillard got LUCKY and just happened to shoot 3 x 3 pointers in a row... 1 on the Lin switch, 2 in OT. I suppose it had to happen to someone...
You should create a new thread for this. But I do find it very interesting is that no matter what is the thread's heading, it winds up to Lin vs the world.
Wow! Way to kill the argument for "Lillard the great". He may be but just don't crown him just yet. By the way, anyone who can pick the next great player on 3 games is... OK, we have bash him enough. He was only trying to encourage our PG to be better, right?
This actually has been discussed and analyzed by both statisticians and psychologists for some time. There seem to have been a series of issues in play. 1) Scouting actually has a VERY low correlation to success, yet it IS traditional. Just like baseball scouts often operated on fuzzy concepts like "winning attitude" or "scowling" in part of their assessments of a "winner's mentality", so do basketball scouts. 2) Human beings by nature compare to things we have seen Before. Here is an example, if you see a 6'5" african american, do you Assume they are good at basketball? What about a 6'5" asian? There are implicit cultural biases that seep into our assessments of other human beings. They aren't malicious, or necessarily "racist" in the direct sense, as opposed to our tendencies to categorize objects in our minds... that happens to include human beings. So, if you saw a 6'2" Asian and someone told you they could be a very good basketball player, it's LESS likely that you would believe it to be true because you have not PERSONALLY seen many players like that. 3) Scouts work for large corporations. Taking high risk decisions (like sticking your neck out) gets you fired. It's easy to point to player A and say they looked like another prospect that went to the NBA... it's MUCH harder to point to Lin and say he'll develop into an NBA player. Given two players of similar talent, where one "looks" like the real deal, and one does NOT, human nature is to avoid risk and go with the more easily justified choice in case of failure. 4) We tend to give weight to previous opinions even when the evidence is to the contrary. The Best scouts theoretically work for the highest paying organizations (the NBA pays scouts more than colleges do). However, they don't assume that the college scouts are wrong... add enough bad college scouts mislabelling Lin, and that ends up like a Red Letter that follows him compounding the initial bad scouting reports. Scout 1 : He's a D2 player high school player Scout 2 : He's just a D2 NCAA player or a D1 school would have offered a scholarship Scout 3 : He's just a small school D1 player, so he's not good enough to draft Scout 4 : He was undrafted, so he can't be NBA quality Scout 5 : He barely got into the NBA, so he's no better than a back up Scout 6 : He was cut so he can't be better than just a marginal starter Etc, etc At every level, the assessment of previous scouts is factored into the next level of scouting, despite the lower level of scouting being the result of inferior scouting and flawed decision making. 5) Confirmation bias. Everyone HATES being wrong. Most human beings will do most anything to avoid admitting that they are wrong. They'll cherry pick facts, ignore data, and even ignore their own eyes in the face of overwhelming evidence. Lin : Elite combine scores in the 40 yard, 100 yard, and lateral quickness. Scout : He's not quick or fast Lin : 6'2" PG (large for the position) Scout : He's not strong or large enough to play the position Lin : Record breaking numbers Scout : It's a small sample size. If he had that much talent, he would have been drafted, never would have been cut, and would have gone to a D1 program. Lin : Poor game against Miami Scout : See! He can't go left (MOST NBA players have a weak side) he's a Turnover Machine (many PG's who handle the ball alot have high TO's, and this is especially true of new players). He's going to suck now that the scouting report is out! (As if NO teams had a scouting report on him for 25 games... or the 15 games AFTER Miami that he still logged 18/7) Just some things to think about...
OMG Hell no. I am not creating a new thread for this. And I beg of you please do not create a new thread of this on my behalf. And it isn't Lin vs the world it is every undrafted player vs the world. A lot of people would be surprised as to how many talented players there are like Jeremy Lin but never get there chance because of the many glass ceilings that the institution of the NBA has imposed. For example a player is only as good as there coach lets them to be more often than not. Last year Lin was blessed to have Dantoni as his coach. Why because he let him turn the ball over as many times as he want. LITERALLY. Like MDA said I don't care if he has 4 -5 turnovers a game as long as he is aggressive getting into the lane and the ball moves. There is a reason why Nash is so turnover prone. Very few other coaches would tolerate that many turnovers from there PG. Look at Darren Collison for example, he played great in his rookie year. Not so great with the Pacers and is now flourishing with the Mavericks likely due to a change of coaching. Not to say that one coach is better than another just some players respond to different people in different ways. Food for thought.
Lillard is a good rookie, but the fact is the Rockets couldn't draft him. Maybe if we did a better job tanking last season. We did draft White, why didn't we compare White vs Lillard? Everyone overreacts. Budinger had a good game 16pt 6reb tonight and beat the Nets in 4th quarter comeback. No one talking about that?
Word. I love Lin to death (I am a 60 years old man btw). I have no concerns who is better than Lin. I just want him to play well, enjoy the game and flash his smiles. In the meantime, elevate his teammates to win the game for the team. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/bk6v1m9dJ9M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> I have mixed feelings with MDA. Without him, there was no Linsanity but hate him riding Lin as the "Secretariat".
To be fair to d'antoni,Boom Dizzle hasn't recover from injury at that time,and he has only TD & Mike Bibby at that time...you might put the blame to the FO as well.
Totally agree about the misperception of draft position. Back in July I wrote: The biggest misperception on Lin is his draft position. Throughout college, he showed he can play. Lin (correction from original post) set all kinds of school records his senior year. Lin also set all kinds of Ivy League records; points, rebounds, assists, and steals. So why wasn't he drafted? IMO race is the only reason. Let me break that misperception by asking you this: What if Lin were a top 5 draftee coming into NBA? If many people considered last season as Lin's rookie year, many would considered Lin had a 'normal to good season.' - Linsanity would never happen. - No one would call Lin 'flash in the pan.' - Rocket would never have him for free. Perception has a funny way of playing with people's mind, doesnt it? http://e3.f2.84ae.static.theplanet.com/showpost.php?p=7082180&postcount=97
Work ethic. Good interview. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VIQJGIkIvog" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
After reading through this thread, I do feel the need to clarify: I was ONLY objecting to the specific term 'glass ceiling' when referring to Lin's situation in NY. The term 'glass ceiling' implies that Lin was saddled with lowered expectations in NY, and that moving to Houston somehow 'freed' him from those lowered expectations, and now he has the 'freedom' to excel. That is ALL I was referring to. Because I do not believe that to be the case for him in NY, that's all. In no way did I mean to imply anything else. I know he always had (and has) his detractors. I am simply of the opinion that, had he stayed in NY, there was no 'glass ceiling' of lowered expectations there from which he was 'freed' - as the article suggests. There was no glass ceiling for Lin in NY - nothing institutional or otherwise preventing him from reaching his full potential (whatever that may be). Does that mean he is the greatest PG of all time? Or could have been there? No. Might he have fallen back down to Earth, perhaps never matching the run of success he had last year? Of course. But none of that implies a 'glass ceiling', and that is all I was objecting to.
4:15 - "When we shoot, there's a machine called 'The Gun' (automatic rebounding machine)...it keeps track of your shooting percentage...His bad shooting day now is better than his best shooting day last year." 7:35 - "When the critics, when the so-called know-it-alls of basketball, say 'Oh he's not a consistent shooter,' that's not what I see, I see it everyday that he is a great shooter." 9:14 - "Based on our workouts this summer, he's a much better shooter than he was last year at this time." This guy must be Lin's Information Minister
Actually, it's a mixed bag. His 3pt shooting is currently than last year (.333 vs .320). His FT shooting is significantly higher (.915 vs .798). His 2 point shooting is weaker (.390 vs .446). I haven't done the percentage breakdowns by location yet, but I'm guessing he's mostly suffering at the rim right now, ie, his ability to finish. And the sample size is small... so lots of time to see it play out.
If Lin doesn't attack the basket as often as he did in NY, he'd better find his jumper asap. He has to find a way to score more as the 2nd option.
Pretty.... pretty.... pretty.... good! Eventhough Lin has pretty decent stats imo his true qualities are best described in non stats parameters kinda this coach is putting it ....he is talking about his court presence, inner confidence, and not being fearful of big stage, not afraid to make mistake and similar...
