ClutchFans Game Thread: Rockets @ Wizards 12/9/2006

Id argue the shots he took in the 4th were considerably tougher then the shots he took against haywood, thomas.

 

Why not? Yao can take and make his fadeaways against anybody

 

Who said Yao didn't play great in the fourth quarter? I know I never said that. Offensively, he played about as well as I've ever seen him play.

By "event study" stats, you're talking about +/- stats? I'd like to know those good reasons. Perhaps you can explain them or give a link that does so.

Yes, you can. Lots of factors in play. If McGrady wasn't injured, Yao would have had to take as many shots. Who knows, maybe we wouldn't have won as a result.

"Statistical inferences"?

I'm saying that when a bad defensive team loses their first and second option at center, that's probably going to have an impact on their defense. Particularly in their ability to guard a dominant low post scorer like Yao. That's a "common sense" inference. I never attempted to quantify it.

 

If that was true, he'd score 35 points every game.

 

Actually Yao's scoring is down because of the blowouts. Aside from the Wolves game he could have score 30+ pts but because of the blowouts he's been on the bench in the 4th.

 

Foul call depends on the refs. ET thomas ran away with a few non-calls in the second quarter. Same for Haywood. JVG even got a T for that. While in the 4th quarter, refs started calling fouls on the illegal defense. Even if ET thomas had not been injured, Yao still would get his points. Yao really feeled it in the 4th quarter. The only thing I can say is: Unstoppable. Just like arenas was unstoppable in the 2nd & 3rd quarter.

 

I watched some clips of the game again.. first three quarters all yaos baskets were 5 foot hooks and lay ups.. aside from one fadeaway, his misses were mostly on jumpshots, one was a block by etan. In the 4th all his baskets were tightly contested and while facing a double team 10+ feet from the basket.

This shows that the wizards actually tried to buckle down more defensively on yao when tmac went out in the 4th. Ill agree when u claim with haywood or thomas guarding yao, he probably would not have had 12 ft attempts in the 4th... but dont forget 4 of the attempts came against thomas, before he twisted his ankle. also, if etan or haywood were guarding yao and not fouling, this would cause yao to take difficult shots.. but the way he was feeling it those shots would be falling. I believe when yao catches fire.. its a lot like kobe.. no one in the league can stop him... those fadeaway jumpers are unguardable.

 

yao is owning it up! it's funny to see the other team's coaches on the bench like putting their heads down after yao makes another shot.

tmac was doing really well..like the tmac of a few seasons ago..darn...i hope he's okay.

Alston and Head are definitely important components of our team. Alston - point guard..also 3 point shooter and takes it inside too..fast break and passing..managing
head - shooting, driving..good stuff.

hayes and battier are definitely good, with mutombo backing up

and spanoulis should be getting better along with novak and jl3.

 

That's fine.

Simple. Because you can never separate such events. For example, let's say the stock market, good earnings figures should increase stock prices right? Be careful, that's just a theory. At one point some guy came up with the idea, "hey, let's do any event study to test that theory."

The problem is, there are many factors that can affect stock price. So when a company announce good earnings, it isn't even possible to analyze the impact (or the degree of impact) to tangibly know whether there are any at all.

Similarly, Haywood and Thomas being out let Yao put a good game? Very possible. How do you test that theory though? How do you separate that event from TMac and Hayes being out?

There is a reason event studies are dead.

Now we're getting somewhere.

This doesn't make any sense. Forgetting that thing called standard deviation did we?

Yao is expected to dominate against weak inside teams? Fine. Yao is also the best 5 in the league. He's expect to put up big numbers against everybody.

Guess what, he doesn't always. Suppose you could somehow tangibly measure it, and Yao should get say, 15 points a quarter against Lang/Booth. He just got 23. He overperformed. For all we know, he could have put up a stinker and gotten 10 points.

Just because his averages says he's supposed to dominate doesn't mean he always will. But last night he did. He had a great game.

If we are going to go with your argument of "he's supposed to dominate against blah blah," this board wouldn't exist. He's the best 5 in the league. He's supposed to be getting 25/10/2. What's there to argue about?

 

Lets shift gears and talk about our coach for this game. JVG deserves the credit for a nice game plan for this back to back. I noticed the changes when he plays Yao.

 

This is so true. How many times have we seen Yao catch fire on this shot, and hit 10 to 15 in a row? When the fadeaway jumper is on, Yao can score 30-40 easily.

 

yao has definitely improved his stamina.. he was agressive, sharp, accurate at the 4th quarter of the second game of a back to back..

but there were still some instances where I saw him put his hands on his knees.. maybe he can at least put on his taichi stance

 

That's not convincing. If you have enough of a sample to where other relevant factors are "evened out", you can understand how a particular factor impacts the stock price.

But let's keep the discussion to basketball, much simpler and more predictable than a market.

My argument doesn't rest on such a test even existing. Even assuming you're right and there's no way to test the theory, so what? It's still a reasonable, common sense inference to make. Just as it makes sense to play Yao more than Dikembe. Or it makes sense to start Tracy instead of Luther.

Is Eddie Jordan a fool for playing Haywood and Thomas more than the other centers? No, he knows they give his team the best chance to win because they're simply better. You don't have to be a believer in +/- stats to recognize that.

You keep saying this. Can you point to an actual, legitimate source that explains how/why event studies are dead in economics? I'm just curious how true this statement really is. And if it is true in that domain, whether those same reasons discredit +/- statistics in sports.

Did you read what I said?

I used the word "probably" for a reason. I understand Yao isn't always going to have great games, even against players he is supposed to play well against. That's why I've said in this thread that Yao took advantage of the circumstances, "to his credit".

 

For someone who didn't even watch the game and argues that Yao's 23 points in the fourth Q. was the result of weaker defenders is just ridiclous. They double teamed Yao in the fourth Q and almost all his shots in the 4th were difficult ones. As a matter of fact, he had much better score opportunities in the first 3 Qs but he didn't finish them. Yao just got hot in the 4th Q. Period.

The reason he went to the line a lot more in the fourth Q because:

a. he was much more aggressive in the fourth Q.
b. after T-Mac went down, they run every offence though Yao.
c. Washington went over their foul limit too early so every call sent Yao to the line. Ref called a lot tighter on defenders in the fourth Q for whatever the reason.

I never post anything. But watching someone spent so much time writes analysis for a game which he didn't even watch drives me crazy.

 

Hi, I think you didn't get what I meant at the first place. When you implied "if Thomas was not injuried, Yao might not have such a good game since Thomas did a good job defending Yao"; I think it is then valid to discuss "if Tmac was not injuried, would we win or not". Yes, I know there is a big thread discussing Tmac's injury, but nobody---at least to my knowledge----talk about "if Tmac stays in the game" like you suggested "if Yao was not against 4th string player". If like you said, your analysis is to the entire game, not nitpicking Yao, you should consider both the injuries (Thomas and Tmac). At least to me, Tmac was having a great game before he went out, so if you brought back Thomas to limit Yao's shoots, why not consider Tmac's chance providing he is not injuried as well. When you made your comment based on one assumption (Thomas' injury), I feel you are somewhat biased. Anyway, Tmac's injury is well known, Yao playing against Lang, Booth is not a breaking news either.

 

The double teams in the 4th quarter were weak. As you watched the game, you know this. And what makes you so sure that Yao just didn't finish the shots?

Maybe one reason was because he was being guarded by a bunch of scrubs who don't have much respect from the officials?

My "analysis" is nothing but pointing out that Washington's lack of a rotation center in the final quarter probably had an impact on the game.

Yao's post game quote:

If JVG and Yao can acknowledge it, why can't you just accept it as a possible factor as well?

 

But I was interested in discussing something that probably helped lead to the final result (us winning). It's unclear how T-Macs injury would have changed that result. Would we have won by more with him in the game? Or maybe we would have lost because Yao's gets less shots? Difficult to say. What's much more clear is that Washington losing their 2 centers hurt them and helped us.

If we had lost the game, I would have brought up McGrady's injury first, because it would seem more relevant in that case.

But no one mentioned anything about it. Even now, you can see there are many people who don't believe Thomas/Haywood's absence had any impact. It's a non-issue for most people here. Well, I don't think it's a non-issue personally. That's why I brought it up. Talking about Tmacs injury and how it impacted the game ... I don't have any take on that. Maybe it hurt us, maybe it some how helped us. Clearly, it allowed Yao to dominate down the stretch. It's unclear how that would have impacted the final score.

 

I know this is the post-game Analysis... but this is just one game... where both teams came off a back to back... no one will remember this game come playoff time... if we make it into the post season or not...

I think it is safe to say that every will pick up their game in the playoffs... so to do a indepth analysis of one basketball game... is just a waste of time in my opinion...

Just like Yao and Tmac missing 75% of their shots against the Wolves... a game I think we should have won....

to game agaisnt the Wizards.... where Yao hit 68% of his shots... a game I thought they should have lost...


what counts is the playoffs... this is just one game more that gets us closer to that...


as for the stock market... you can do all the indepth analysis you want...but sometimes you got to just pull the trigger...because no matter what your still taking a risk....

nothing is guaranteed except death and taxes....

 

The injuries had a huge impact. I agree on these comments, particularly the "maybe it hurt us, maybe it somehow help us." The outcome of the game if Tmac was not out, and how his injury altered the game is more valuable an analysis and is more interesting though it is unclear. Can not agree your previous post which just suggests we got lucky because Yao stepped up when he played with weaker opponents though. Like I said previously, you probably want a more convincing game without much argument, but that is like JVG right?

 

Absolutely agreed on this one. After he got the fourth foul and stayed in the game... my first thought was.. JVG's going to let him either foul out or figure out how to keep from fouling to remain in the game.

Hopefully the lesson sticks. (which I think it will)