Actually, I was operating from the assumption that they were errors by Lin until I examined each clip multiple times. Is it possible I gave him the "benefit of the doubt" on some of the questionable video views? Sure. Despite my attempts to strip subjectivity, I'm still human. :grin:
I'm done here. I think you are One of the most logical Lin fans on the internet. I am sure part of your bias in otherwise fair posts is due to the laughably critical interpretations of his game. A lot of his turnovers are due to being on a young team, running a fast paced offense and big men with horrible hands. He still needs to drastically improve his decision making to become a top-20 PG.
Hell no he should not. He was worse than Lin last night. In no way shape or form should he be starting at all.
Again, the detail analysis by Torocan was intelligent, informative and worthy of discussion. Please continue.
It's possible that they want him to push hard to he learns how to score in traffic better. I think if they stick with it he will get better at it.
thanks for the taking the time to make this post. good stuff. if anyone cares about objectivity at all, you should read this post. can't get more objective then looking at the actual videos themselves. you can frame stats to fit whatever story you want to tell, but what you see on video is what you get. again, good stuff. and if i may add - the reason it's talked about so much is because clyde and worrell are looking for it too and point it out every single time lin commits a turnover in the paint, with "and lin jumps in the air with no idea where to go with the ball, AGAIN". well, you keep repeating it and soon enough anyone watching will be looking for the same thing. I don't disagree that the prime is typically 27/28-32, however the studies *specifically* state that it is NOT diminishing returns until they reach the ages of 27/28-32. Lin, should he follow the norm *should* actually continue to improve at a similar pace as his earlier years UNTIL he plateau's around 27/28 (+1-2 years as PG's develop more slowly). And it's not just about "years" in the NBA, it's minutes Played in the NBA. Last year was his first full season with a team getting regular minutes. The year before his season was basically 2 months in a lock out year. And Patterson is still a "young" and developing player. So is Bledsoe. And since you brought up Bledsoe... Eric Bledsoe : Passing Assists/TO - 3.5 (IE, WORSE than Lin, though really the same ballpark for all intensive purposes) http://www.82games.com/1314/13PHO2.HTM TO's while jump passing is memorable. It's highly visible. And Lin's "reputation" means people are "looking" for those TO's and thus find them more memorable. It's like sitting in a park and nothing catches your eye, then someone says to you "Did you notice all the girls wearing short skirts?". Suddenly, everywhere you look there are short skirts. The actual data (and video break downs) do not come anywhere close to supporting the idea that Lin jump passes 1-2 times per game, let alone jump passes without intent 1-2 times per game. And the perception that his passing vision and IQ are dramatically lower, or that his TO's from passes are way out of line for his age and experience is suspect at best. That's the problem with the "eye test". Our memory is fundamentally flawed. It rewrites itself after the fact to fit our mental narratives. And our perception of "fact" is shaped by our expectation. If you *expect* Lin to make TO's, then they leap out at you. It's no different than an air ball being more memorable than a bounce off the rim (despite the on court impact being identical). I stand by my original assertion, that the focus on his Jump Pass TO's is overblown. Yes, they can improve. Yes, there are silly errors. However, they're not nearly as prevalent or in aggregate as negatively impactfull as people are decrying in this thread. And given his age and experience, not really out of line with what *should* be expected. And that has *nothing* to do with his salary, which is simply an entirely different discussion. Lin being paid his salary does not change that he's a human being and largely subject to the learning limitations of the rest of the human race.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE] I don't think even torocan would agree with this. How is watching clips any different than the eyeball test? It's about the least objective thing you can do. Lin's jump passes were a thing in New York and have continued here. Clyde and Worrell are not making it up. I'd like to see a video of all of his jump passes together. Are they overblown? Maybe. It is clearly an issue though.
I don't think even torocan would agree with this. How is watching clips any different than the eyeball test? It's about the least objective thing you can do. Lin's jump passes were a thing in New York and have continued here. Clyde and Worrell are not making it up. I'd like to see a video of all of his jump passes together. Are they overblown? Maybe. It is clearly an issue though.[/QUOTE] It's different if you're recording a data set. Since most data is accumulated through observation by *someone*, then observation itself isn't necessarily flawed as long as it's recorded using a reasonable methodology. My issue is the interpretation of observation without methodological approach to how those observations are done, interpreted or subject to critical review (eyeball estimation). So... Watching video and recording outcomes in order to systematically measure and interpret data = good. Watching video and interpreting data without context, measurement or scientific method = bad. Telling me you watched a "clip" tells me nothing. Telling me you watched 30 clips and the recorded outcomes were X tells me something (or nothing, depending on what you're recording and trying to argue).
There is no way McHale is going anywhere and Ive got good sample size to know Morey strikes well on 2nd rd picks.
I don't think even torocan would agree with this. How is watching clips any different than the eyeball test? It's about the least objective thing you can do. Lin's jump passes were a thing in New York and have continued here. Clyde and Worrell are not making it up. I'd like to see a video of all of his jump passes together. Are they overblown? Maybe. It is clearly an issue though.[/QUOTE] watching clips allows you to at least replay the play and take other things into consideration vs. in a live environment. not saying it's NOT an issue, and yes, it was there in nyc. but it is a bit overblown on here and the effects it has on the win/loss column. the original argument was that lin's jump passes are bad because he has no idea where to go with it and does this quite often. the counter argument is that his jump passes aren't any worse then other passes and doesn't contribute to as many turnovers as people think.
I don't think even torocan would agree with this. How is watching clips any different than the eyeball test? It's about the least objective thing you can do. Lin's jump passes were a thing in New York and have continued here. Clyde and Worrell are not making it up. I'd like to see a video of all of his jump passes together. Are they overblown? Maybe. It is clearly an issue though.[/QUOTE] heh? It's different than the eyeball test because torocan is watching the raw, uncut video of pretty much all the turnovers. How is it clearly an issue when torocan broke it down so clearly? You can attach all his jump passes and like torocan said, most are not going to be an issue, i'm sure there's a number of no look jump passes leading to nice assists. You are just fixated to a point, where every time you see a bad jump pass you act like it happens every 5 minutes.
I don't think even torocan would agree with this. (what the heck was that? torocan or an imposter using his account?)
Not sure why you believe Canaan has the best upside. If the reason is that he has not shown much so by default he has the most potential, then well yeah. But then it's an empty kind of potential. If you see something special about this guy that both Bev and Lin don't have, then I don't know what that is. The only thing I see Canaan better than the other PGs on our team is shooting.
Shooting, shot selection, and ability to draw fouls are his two best qualities. He is also a more than adequate passer. His shot is not falling right now, but I expect he will find his rhythm by mid next season. He does not take low efficient mid range shoots unless he absolutely has to at end of shot clock. He will let Harden take the tough shots because that Harden is the best on team at making the tough shots. He has the potential to be the most efficient offensive scorer for the Rockets on a decent number of attempts. On the drawing fouls, his free throw rate (FTA/FGA) is very close to Harden's. His 3 point rate is better than Harden's. I expect he will be as efficient as Harden is shooting 3 pointers and drawing fouls, but not at finishing after contact or in mid range. I worry about his defense and whether he can adjust to how well defenses close out on him.
Canaan is so tiny, Joe Johnson made him look like a gymnast It's going to take him a long time to really settle in. He's simply not ready.
We desperately need a starting caliber PG. But yes, lets start Cannon all the way to the 8th spot here we come.
