Truth be told, I haven't read completely all of the posts in this particular discussion but this one here is so reasoned and rational and understanding of how people feel and react to things....I just wanted to say that I really appreciated it.
Can the Rockets hire this guy for the off-season? This guy is tough. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4NSwQAGfN5s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I've never believed any NBA coach would have bias against his starters, just based on the simple fact that the coaches need his starters to win the ball game for them. But the 2nd game vs. Blazers change that. Lin played a very good game, in fact, he was the major reason the Rockets was in that game. So when Sampson sat him on the bench for the entire OT, there is only one explanation for that: bias.
Oh yea. And how about playing Marcus Morris extended minutes today? It was like 4 vs 5 out there with the Spurs.
I can't say I agree. While I don't like Sampson's decision to sit Lin (nor do I think it's the right one), there are many other possible explanations. Lin has been struggling with his perimeter shots (still does) and doesn't space the floor well. (And his knee def. wasn't 100% back then.) Stats showed that the Lin/Harden combo back then consistently got outscored by the opponents, whereas the Douglas/Harden combo has a positive +/-. So, there's a possibility that the choice of TD over Lin is simply to create space for Harden's offense. Think about it... An ass't coach rarely gets the opportunity to be an acting HC. For someone who was given that opportunity (albeit under tragic circumstance) and who presumably wanted to become head coach one day, why would he jeopardize the game and the opportunity to showcase his coaching talent to the entire NBA over a personal bias?
Given your dabbling in stats, and you knew raw +/- was such a bad stat, why present it at all (especially in a 'LOF' topic). It's probably why you got a bad reaction, given your reputation here as a stats based poster yet using raw +/- to evaluate this statement. It may come across as you purposely trying to invoke the ire of Lin fans. Just my opinion. Of course your counter to that is that the statement is bad or too general, but rarely would people say 'We tend to outscore teams when player A is on the floor after adjusting for context'. It is up to the stat holder to intepret the statement in the most useful way and provide a good stat irregardless of the statement IMO. Imagine if you were an analyst for a Fortune 500 firm and your boss asked you to verify that 'Product A makes more profit with Feature X than without', you wouldn't simply use raw or simple stats even if the statement is simple, but advanced stats to make sure your analysis was correct.
As far as I can tell, durvasa used a stat that showed that the team does not lose leads overall when Lin is off the floor. It was a direct refutation of the first poster's statement, and I don't see why it would be up to durvasa to do any more than this. If anything, if someone believes that the +/- stat isn't a valid measure for this statement, then he or she should provide a way to prove or disprove it in another way.
The way I look at it, there's no such thing as "good" or "bad" raw stats. A raw stat -- that is, a stat which directly records what happened in the game -- is either accurate or inaccurate. I assume the scorekeepers are tracking +/- accurately. We can judge stats as "good" or "bad" if they are analytic in nature. For example, a stat like "Wins Produced" which is meant to estimate the number of wins a player added. Or RAPM which is meant to estimate how many net points a player adds per X possessions relative to an average player. Such stats are based on models that are trying to estimate something, and they can do a relatively good or poor job of that. Or, if I take a raw stat like +/- and used it to make a qualitative judgment about the performance of a player ("Douglas had a better +/- than Lin, therefore he played a better game or he did more to help his team win") then that would be a bad conclusion drawn from the stat. But it doesn't mean the stat itself is "bad". I'll give another example. How many points a player scores per game is not a particularly good measurement of how effective a scorer he is. But I wouldn't say PPG is a bad stat. Its telling something factual. The conclusions I draw from that stat or how I use it, however, may be "good" or "bad". "The other team tends to come back" were the words he used. I interpreted it as "the other team tends to outscore us" which seems to me to be the most straightforward way to understand that statement. Not sure how the words he used can be construed as "the other team tends to play better than us, adjusting for the quality of players on the floor" or whatever you have in mind.
I dont know if "bias" is the right word to use. Maybe Sampson's misconception of Lin's defensive ability versus TD. We need to be open minded and rational about what was happening at that time. It was still early in the season and we had lost a number of games where we had big leads. We had already lost once in OT to Portland. Lin was in the middle of a horrible shooting slump 7/25 fga, .280, 3/11 .273, 3pa, only 20pts the 3 previous games and if I remember correctly was passing up open shots. Also remember the MIA game was only 2 games ago and probably still fresh on Lin and Sampson's mind. Looking back @ the play by play: Lin took only one shot in the 4th qtr and was fouled @ 7:04 (93-91). Lin left the game @ 6:47 (95-91). TD was already iin the game @ that point. Lin in for TD @ 4:19 (102-98). TD in for Lin @ 3:17 (104-100) TD misses two shots. Lin in for TD @ 2:16 (105-103) Lin has an ast but Lillard scores 6 pts. TD in for Lin @ 0:10.2 (111-111) TD was 0/3 in OT Lin 36 min, 3/8 fga, 0/1 3pa, 5/7 fta, 6 reb, 11 ast, 1 stl, 2 blk, 3 tov, 11 pts. Lillard 42 min, 9/18 fga, 3/9 3pa, 6/6 fta, 5 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 0 blk, 4 tov, 27 pts TD 30 min, 2/11 fga, 0/5 3pa, 5/5 fta, 2 reb, 1 ast, 2 stl, 0 blk, 0 tov, 9 pts Lillard had only scored 8pts(4fts) while Lin was on the floor up until the 6pts in the final minute+ that lead to OT. We put Parsons on Lillard in OT but he still scored 5pts. Did benching Lin in OT help us win? No. Was it reasonable for Sampson to bench Lin for OT? Maybe.. Lillard was on hot and just scored 6pts on Lin, and Lin wasn't taking shots, but obviously Lillard beat us anyway and TD was shooting poorly and didn't help us win. Did the benching hurt Lin's confidence more? Probably, but all the statements that Sampson hates Lin or Sampson is racist are crazy and stupid. Coaches are human they make mistakes like everyone else. In one of the interviews that Sampson did he said that TD has the mindset of a shooter. He quickly forgets about bad games and continues shooting. On the opposite end is Lin who went to Sampson after the MIA game and said he'd do better next time. Players who have confidence in their shot don't worry about missing open shots. Guys like Parsons, TD and Delfino sometimes start out cold @ 2/6 from 3 but keep shooting from 3 and usually end up 4/7 or 5/10.
Sampson can have "Bias" towards Lin without realized it himself, and I think that's the case here. This is similar to the situation when Lin was not recruited out of high school. This has only happened once in history for any California D II Player of the Year. People say that it's not due to the race, but it is. It's because this "Asian cannot ball" stereotype, and stereotype is a kind of racist.
I'm specifically talking about this game here. Anyone watched that game knew that Lin played a very good game in the regulation, ran the offense very well, played solid defense on the other PG. That's why it was a shock to so many people when he didn't play at all in OT. I'm not a big fan of sitting the player on the bench whenever he makes a mistake, because it mess up his confidence, makes him tentative on the court. But I also understand that player needs to be held accountable, so I don't have problem with coach sitting players down when not performing. But that game was different, Lin was really solid on both end of the floor. There was no basketball reason to explain that move.
i just don't see how it's so difficult to see this. i do believe in innocent until proven guilty but how do you prove it unless Sampson goes out and admit it himself and that ain't gonna happen, ever. so whats wrong with thinking it when so many instances points to it? benching Lin in so many 4th quarters and the OT vs Portland where he was playing great defense on Lilliard, benching Lin twice just because he thinks Douglas "seems to be a better matchup defensively", benching Lin when he missed a spot up jumper when you tell him to spot up in the first place, yelling at Lin when he's helping out on defense but his help didn't cover his man. I don't know, maybe Sampson isn't bias, but if that's the case, we can conclude that he's a horrible coach for doing these things.
Who are you supposed to play? Defino was out and Patterson is still out. The rookies Jones and D Mo for the most part only play during garbage time. It was a close game that we lost because of turnovers, fouls trouble and poor free throw shooting. Our biggest weakness as a team is defensively @ PF. We need someone who can get 8 rebs, block a few shots, shoot the 3 with confidence, can play above the rim for tip dunks and lobs and isn't a headcase. Maybe it could be Jones or D Mo in the future, but I don't think they're there yet.
One game, one judgement call, and somehow he is bias against Lin? It's not like he didn't play him at all. Lin was averaging 30 min + a game. He was having a decent game but Lillard was heating up. Portland had already won a game against the Rockets earlier in the season with Lillard going off and the airballed shot by Lin earlier against Miami might of played a role in Sampsons thinking.
So you are saying that the memory of Lin's bad play in previous game had stronger influence on Sampson than the solid play just happened in front of him? You believe it's Sampson's judgment call, while I believe it's his bias towards Lin. Let's just leave it like that.
You got the games mixed up. The 1st one was @ home and McHale was still coaching and Lin played in OT. The 2nd game was the one Lin didn't play in OT and the that I posted about.
