better than coming up with nothing and just spouting out 'subjective' opinion. at least back up your argument with some stat or numbers, or gtfo
Boxscore watchers. That's the reason that worthless stats like +/- and PER have been created. They are easy and any one boxscore watchers can bring them up anytime like they mean something.
and i'm pretty sure it's just not a wild coincidence that two players who actually had a good game (Capela and Harden) topped +/- rating and Brewer, who pretty much everyone agrees is the worst player on the roster right now, recorded the lowest rating. it might not mean that much, but it's not as meaningless of a stat as some of you make it out to be. at the very least, it can be a rough measure as to a player's overall impact on the game.
I do, but I don't rely on +/- to judge someone's impact on defensive rotations and assignments. Read my last two posts.
No it can't. Listen there are many better stats to look at if you want to look at someone's impact on a game. It's all encompassing stats like PER and +/- that utterly worthless. Look at fg% look at tov. I agree that measuring defence in one single game and having it portrayed in stats it's not easy. (though however who knows what will happen when in the next few days and weeks when it's sheduled the Sportvu data will get more released. ).But at least offence is and +/- or PER isn't it. They are the stats that people used 10 years ago. Even worse than raw stats because they are misleading.
and i don't either. i'm just saying i at least back up my argument with some hard cold facts, whereas you don't. if you are going to argue that a player who netted 50 points with 50% shooting and had 9 rebounds, 8 assists somehow 'hurt' the team, you better come up with really convincing evidence other than how many turnovers he committed and your 'subjective' opinion on how Harden played in general.
There are no definite stats for it, read Mine and malakas' last posts in the Ariza thread and look at some of the game situations in transition, where the team defense hasn't yet settled and is relying on Harden to stay in front of his defensive assignment. You'll notice how he completely kills us in those situations and gives up a lot of points that should never happen and make the game much more close than it should be.
of course you should look at ordinary stats, that's not what I'm talking about. Yung-T is arguing Harden actually 'hurt' the team with his plays, despite his very good 'ordinary stat'. so i'm saying what kind of evidence can you present other than 9 turnovers that Harden actually had a bad game? that's when +/- came in. doesn't mean +/- is an be-all-end-all.
And take a look at situations im half court sometimes where he completely loses track of his assignment and causes our defense to fold. Those are extremely hard to make up for and hurt the whole defense of the team.
again, that's your opinion. no evidence what so ever it was Harden's fault that we won the game so close. i already presented all the relevant stats and numbers, and they seem to almost exclusively favor my argument. nuff said.
Read all my posts, I'm not saying he made 50 points but cost us more than 50 and cost the team in the end. My point is that all his extreme deficiencies make his 50 points a LOT less worth than 50 points by a player that plays okay in all other categories and commits to defense and team-ball. His net points are much lower than what the 50pts tell you.
the whole team sucked at defense. actually, bev and brewer seemed even worse. again, your subjective opinion doesn't matter that much buddy.
You can watch the game again if you are so interested and then count bad rotations and transition points. Also how many points those turnovers led to. I think Vantagesports and Sportvu maybe have those availabe but not sure. I dont 'care so much for individual games stats, esp for a RS game against the freaking SIXERS. If it was a playoff game then maybe I would look into it. However to come back to the discussion Paul George maybe have scored only 33 points but he led his team in a win over the bulls who have one of teh best defences in the league, and he went vs Butler. When judging a players perfomance please take into account who guarded him and who he guarded too. A win over the Bulls alone is much more impressive to me than a win over the Sixers with 2 points. And in the end both those two are the leaders and stars of their team and their teams perfomance reflects upon them too. That's why many players haven't been voted All Stars even with good raw stats. Because their teams don't win.
and since OKC handily won tonight's game despite Westbrook committing 11 turnovers with only 14 points with lousy shooting, Westbrook's numbers must mean much more than the surface, right? what a silly argument. again, basketball is a team sport. stop focusing on one player's stat and look at how the team played overall.
is there any other relevant stat other than the ordinary ones and +/- to gauge a player's performance and impact he had on a game?
