Another question, and maybe this was addressed (I didn't go look at the original piece), is this: What about common opponents? The Rockets and Clippers don't play identical schedules, so an analysis of this type would also have to take into consideration each player's performance against the teams they would actually be playing against over the course of the season, or rather how many times they would be playing each of those teams, particularly in their divisions. Don't know how much of an effect it would ultimately have, but it could swing the win total a couple of games if one player has a significant statistical jump or decline against particular teams which they may play more or less often because of being on the new team.
It would have an almost negligible effect. NBA schedules really aren't that different over the course of an entire season. Especially for teams in the same conference. Even if it does swing the predicted wins by a couple games, its not particularly significant considering how rough these projections are in the first place.
According to their app, yes. Artest was an inefficient offensive player, and they project 57 wins if Artest took Ariza's minutes last year.
I swapped Yao Ming out for Pops and our team went 54-28 with Pops playing Yao's minutes. Yeah, this is an accurate statistical analysis, definitely. Someone wake me up when they allow us to swap 2009 McGrady with 2004 McGrady.
Well that app is entertaining, if not entirely accurate. I swapped out Brooks for the legendary idol known as Ramon Sessons. Houston lost 3 wins and Milwaukee lost 2. It was a wash.
On second thought I'm not sure I was reading it correctly; there are too many records for me to keep straight.
So, the assumption here is that players will play the same way in different situations on different teams?
I think the assumption is that the player's efficiency will not change, unless I'm misreading it. And, yeah, that would be a bad assumption.
This isn't the gospel. Over relying on stats is nonsense. I can bet you there is no way that we can win 57 games with Ariza for Ron,despite the latter's inefficiency. I'm not looking for Thornton/ Shane, but I can bet you the no stats star will look weaker without Yao,and even to a certain extent Ron.
I always say stats are for suckers, but not saying durvasa is a sucker . Imo, basketball is very fluid and players make bigger impacts than any other sport. Comparing a guy that can create shot or contested shot vs a screen shooter is not comparable. Like you can take a guy like redd and gleen at the way he shoots from 3 or just from the field and compare him to a guy like tracy and say he's a better player, but tracy has a much higher impact on the game than a guy like redd,allen,rip, and guys like that. So a hypothetical swap of shane and thornton can't be calculted and interpreted into the rocket only winning 45 games.
You know, I basically agree. And I don't take these projections as solid proof that Battier is better than Thornton. What it's doing is putting forth, in more concrete terms, the argument of why Battier might help a team more than Thornton. People could still disagree. Some people might look at a boxscore and say "Well, obviously Thornton is a better player than Battier." Ok, that's looking at one set of numbers. Looking at different numbers, as these people are doing, we could draw a different conclusion. And at any rate, when I created the thread, I was more interested in the guy's explanation of the numbers (based on sound basketball concepts) rather than the numbers themselves.
What am I missing here? Is there any rumors that this trade could actually happen? I love Shane, but for the future I would jump at this (considering we essentially are in rebuilding mode!). Dont think the Clippers would want any part of it though.
What exactly is Al Thornton supposed to be good at anyway? Honestly, from the box score, pretty much the only thing he has going for him is endurance; the ability to miss a bunch of shots while playing an extraordinary amount of minutes. Honestly, the best thing you can say about the guy if you watch him is that he's a thoroughly mediocre player, perhaps taking the title away from Anthony Parker this past year. For everyone who thinks that Battier can't play with Ariza, Thornton would be even worse. Can only play the 3, can't shoot treys; needs high mpg to be effective, leading to decreased development for Taylor and Budinger; and in 2 years, he'd probably be moved for a spare part or not be matched as a RFA. Of course, he's still only entering his 3rd year in the league, but you have to be distressed that he's going to be 26 in December and stagnated last year. Travis Outlaw is pretty much superior or equal in every statistical category, and if you called the Blazers with that offer, they'd say "no backsies" before you finished speaking. If the Clippers fired Mike Dunleavy, traded for Battier, and hired a coach who would match his style to fit Baron Davis's game, that team would no doubt in my mind be a playoff team; there is a ton of talent there with absolutely no professionalism, work ethic, or leadership.
