Game Thread 2022-23 Game #19 - BLAZERS @ KNICKERBOCKERS - NOVEMBER 25, 2002 - FRIDAY - 4:30 PM (PDT) ROOT

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Look like the starters put a lot of minutes 38 minutes for Nurk that's a lot for him.
 
Tince said:
I'm sure there are scenarios where the math doesn't play out, but in general, it's the right play.

A "bad" shot probably has a 30% chance of going in, meaning you could expect about 0.66-1pt/attempt. Let's average that out and say you can expect 0.83pts/possession.
A "good" shot probably has say 50% change of going in, meaning you could expect about 1-1.5pt/attempt. Lets average that out and say you can expect 1.25pts/possession.

0.83 x 2 posssessions = 1.66 expected points on a 2 for 1 vs the 1.25 expected points taking one "good" shot. A 30% difference is fairly signficant.

Obviously my math is overly simplistic, but I think you get the point. We've had scenarios where that strategy has got us a quick 6-0 run. We've also had times where we miss both and get outscored by 2-3. Overall, you've got to play the numbers. 4 extra possessions in an NBA game probably means an additional 3-4 wins over the course of the season.
Click to expand...
According to Corey Jez, there’s almost always a PEV, regardless of shot quality.
 
Tince said:
I'm sure there are scenarios where the math doesn't play out, but in general, it's the right play.

A "bad" shot probably has a 30% chance of going in, meaning you could expect about 0.66-1pt/attempt. Let's average that out and say you can expect 0.83pts/possession.
A "good" shot probably has say 50% change of going in, meaning you could expect about 1-1.5pt/attempt. Lets average that out and say you can expect 1.25pts/possession.

0.83 x 2 possessions = 1.66 expected points on a 2 for 1 vs the 1.25 expected points taking one "good" shot. A 30% difference is fairly signficant.

Obviously my math is overly simplistic, but I think you get the point. We've had scenarios where that strategy has got us a quick 6-0 run. We've also had times where we miss both and get outscored by 2-3. Overall, you've got to play the numbers. 4 extra possessions in an NBA game probably means an additional 3-4 wins over the course of the season.
Click to expand...

sorry, not buying it for one main reason....Blazers don't get many good shots on their first attempt in their 2-for-1 attempts.

I'm not sure how you derived your numbers, but the reality is that Portland averages 1.31 points/shot. That is on all shots, but includes Portland's .305 FTRate. But the thing about those 2-for-1 opportunities the Blazers chase, you can't just multiply some imagined rate X2; that's because way too often the first shot they take sucks ass just like Ant's shot did tonight. Portland almost never gets to the FT line on that first shot

I'm not saying that the Blazers shouldn't look for those chances. I'm just saying they should not chuck up a shitty shot just because there's 32 seconds left in a Q
 
wizenheimer said:
sorry, not buying it for one main reason....Blazers don't get many good shots on their first attempt in their 2-for-1 attempts.

I'm not sure how you derived your numbers, but the reality is that Portland averages 1.31 points/shot. That is on all shots, but includes Portland's .305 FTRate. But the thing about those 2-for-1 opportunities the Blazers chase, you can't just multiply some imagined rate X2; that's because way too often the first shot they take sucks ass just like Ant's shot did tonight. Portland almost never gets to the FT line on that first shot

I'm not saying that the Blazers shouldn't look for those chances. I'm just saying they should not chuck up a shitty shot just because there's 32 seconds left in a Q
Click to expand...
I hate even debating terms "good" vs "ok" vs "great" vs "bad" vs "shitty" because they are highly subjective terms, and therefore near meaningless. Your "bad shot" might look differen than what I consider a "bad shot"

Take your theory to Cory Jez, he could give you the raw numbers on it. It's possible all the NBA coaches and analytic guys who coach to this theory are wrong. I'm open to the data either way.
 
Trying to figure out Sharp’s impact on this team right now.
 
THE HCP said:
Trying to figure out Sharp’s impact on this team right now.
Click to expand...

I like Sharpe's potential (as I believe you do as well). Having said that, I can imagine you'll get some of the same stock responses to this question as we've got with others in the past:
  • He'd be so much better if <<coach>> ran plays for him
  • He'd be so much better if <<top players>> passed him the ball
  • He'd be so much better if <<coach>> had confidence in him
  • He'd be so much better if <<coach>> gave him consistent minutes
  • He'd be so much better if <<coach>> didn't pull him after he makes one mistake. <<top player(s)>> can make 3 mistakes and gets to stay in the game.
Fact of the matter is Sharpe is a raw talent, learning the NBA game. Now he's dealing with being on the other teams scouting report, taking care of his body during long road trips, etc. He's got a long way to go.
 
wizenheimer said:
sorry, not buying it for one main reason....Blazers don't get many good shots on their first attempt in their 2-for-1 attempts.

I'm not sure how you derived your numbers, but the reality is that Portland averages 1.31 points/shot. That is on all shots, but includes Portland's .305 FTRate. But the thing about those 2-for-1 opportunities the Blazers chase, you can't just multiply some imagined rate X2; that's because way too often the first shot they take sucks ass just like Ant's shot did tonight. Portland almost never gets to the FT line on that first shot

I'm not saying that the Blazers shouldn't look for those chances. I'm just saying they should not chuck up a shitty shot just because there's 32 seconds left in a Q
Click to expand...
I don't have any numbers to point to, but just watching the games it sure looks/feels like the first shot is almost treated as a throwaway or a "free shot" or something like that.
 
Tince said:
He's pulling 12.6 rebounds per/36 minutes. His career per36 is 12.9. Not much of a difference.
Click to expand...
in the month of november, trail blazers played 10 games

in three of them, nurk has had at least 10 rebounds (10, 11, 13) and in seven of them, hes had (8, 7, 5, 8, 7, 6, 8)

i think as long as we get the rebounds, it shouldnt matter who it is, but its just something that i noticed given hes a center
 
THE HCP said:
Trying to figure out Sharp’s impact on this team right now.
Click to expand...
Seriously i watched him pretty close when i went to the Jazz game. He's so raw at this point. Pretty much was on a leash out there. He's gonna need at least this year to start really contributing. That is if Chauncy is a miracle worker. Work in progress.
 
Mr. Robot said:
in the month of november, trail blazers played 10 games

in three of them, nurk has had at least 10 rebounds (10, 11, 13) and in seven of them, hes had (8, 7, 5, 8, 7, 6, 8)

i think as long as we get the rebounds, it shouldnt matter who it is, but its just something that i noticed given hes a center
Click to expand...
I think you might be able to add some context to that if you added his playing time. For instance if he is in foul trouble he will not have the same impact. Also, some games they played more small ball. That might be why the Per 36 part comes into play?
 
Amazing performances from the Law Offices of Grant, Ant & Hart. Ant had a chance to join Grant in each getting 40 points, but Trendon rushed an inbounds to Grant when Ant was wide open. That is right after he had gone over the back of Randle to stop the clock and give the Knics FT's to make it a one possession game. You could tell from Ant's immediate reaction, he was bummed. Just a brief display of disappointment, and then back to stoic.
 
Joining the teammates scoring 40-40 in a game at Ant’s age would’ve been amazing. With his getting all the way to the rim, running hooks, single motion 3’s … and working on his D … the “kid” is seriously dynamic.
 
blazerfan11 said:
I don't have any numbers to point to, but just watching the games it sure looks/feels like the first shot is almost treated as a throwaway or a "free shot" or something like that.
Click to expand...

Part of the issue is the "2-for-1" term itself is a bit of a misnomer. Teams aren't after two chances to score so much as they're trying to ensure they get the last shot. That way, they know what they have to match at the other end.
 
Sharpe is in boot camp right now....when he figures it out he's going to be a monster...the kid has all the skills he just needs to put them togther and make the playbook second nature
 
Just finished watching. Quite a few impressive things from Grant, Hart, and Ant for sure, but Nurk had some great moments as did Winslow and Watford.
Ant's 3-ball was not great tonight yet he still scored 38. That is encouraging. He has so many different skill sets on offense and the fact that he played 47 minutes and still did not look tired at the end was another good sign. The starters all played huge minutes in a physical game and played hard til the end.

Nice to have a SF who can rebound. Hart is so fun to watch.
 
Tince said:
I'm sure there are scenarios where the math doesn't play out, but in general, it's the right play.

A "bad" shot probably has a 30% chance of going in, meaning you could expect about 0.66-1pt/attempt. Let's average that out and say you can expect 0.83pts/possession.
A "good" shot probably has say 50% change of going in, meaning you could expect about 1-1.5pt/attempt. Lets average that out and say you can expect 1.25pts/possession.

0.83 x 2 posssessions = 1.66 expected points on a 2 for 1 vs the 1.25 expected points taking one "good" shot. A 30% difference is fairly signficant.

Obviously my math is overly simplistic, but I think you get the point. We've had scenarios where that strategy has got us a quick 6-0 run. We've also had times where we miss both and get outscored by 2-3. Overall, you've got to play the numbers. 4 extra possessions in an NBA game probably means an additional 3-4 wins over the course of the season.
Click to expand...

I believe it’s close to 10 wins and that’s being conservative.
 
Grant certainly proved me wrong. I saw him more as a good 3 and D type player.
I did not trust him to put the ball on the floor. But his handles are proving to be good enough to get to the basket and with his length
he can lay it in easily, thus why he is getting hacked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top