Blake's 71.4 win percentage leads team.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
It's real simple folks. This is just another way of stating the +/- stat. This stat is more related to the players and unit you are playing with than how you play yourself.
 
hasoos said:
It's real simple folks. This is just another way of stating the +/- stat. This stat is more related to the players and unit you are playing with than how you play yourself.
Click to expand...

No, it is not exactly like +/- - it is a much less volatile version of it. If the team wins by 2 points for 10 games with you on the court and loses one game by 30 when they run into one of those games, your win% reflects your value a lot better than +/- which will show a big minus.

And, since basketball games are played by 5 men units - it only makes sense to look at what combinations work well and what do not - and win% can give you a pretty decent idea about what players work well in many combinations and what do not...
 
andalusian said:
No, it is not exactly like +/- - it is a much less volatile version of it. If the team wins by 2 points for 10 games with you on the court and loses one game by 30 when they run into one of those games, your win% reflects your value a lot better than +/- which will show a big minus.

And, since basketball games are played by 5 men units - it only makes sense to look at what combinations work well and what do not - and win% can give you a pretty decent idea about what players work well in many combinations and what do not...
Click to expand...

Not really. Because if other players don't get playing time, they really cannot have an accurate rating on the stat. Statistics only really tell a story when there is a huge sample size. PERS only starts to tell a story on a player when it has been measured for about 3 years of their career and they get the playing time to produce accurate stats for it. To clarify this point, many member of the team have not played much or enough with the good units, to compare against him. You can't have a positive stat on this if you never get off the bench.
 
Last edited:
andalusian said:
No, it is not exactly like +/- - it is a much less volatile version of it. If the team wins by 2 points for 10 games with you on the court and loses one game by 30 when they run into one of those games, your win% reflects your value a lot better than +/- which will show a big minus.

And, since basketball games are played by 5 men units - it only makes sense to look at what combinations work well and what do not - and win% can give you a pretty decent idea about what players work well in many combinations and what do not...
Click to expand...

Which looks good when you use multiple games that all fall into that, but as was mentioned earlier, if you are subbed in and out of a game and end up with 5 separate stints on the floor, there is the possibility you can have a horrendous stint, where you have 5 TOs, couple of missed shots, poor defense, and you could have a -25 for that one bad stint. Then, then next 4 stints you play, your team can be +1 each time. For the game, your +/- is -21, but your win% is 80%. That doesn't reflect what actually happened on the court. Sure, you "won" those 4 stints. What if one of those stints was for 15 seconds at the end of a quarter, and you stand in the corner while your star isos on top, and gets a layup? Well, you "won" that stint. So 100% win. But what did you contribute? Likewise, a defender covering you in that same stint covers you out on the perimiter, adn another man gets beat for a layup. He gets a loss, but didn't negatively effect the team.
 
The Synergy Sports analysis of Blake is the one I would put the most credance in. It clearly shows Blake is far and away the best defender at his position on the team (and nearly the best one overall).

Considering that it isn't a real stretch to say he should probably play big minutes. It hurts to type that but it's the truth.

Bayless is shown to be a very valuable scorer who should get at least twice as many minutes as he is.

Offense (which appears to be way easier to judge) is not Blake's strong suit. It really wasn't even in his best season. This year it is way worse.

But since all of the other guys who play in the backcourt are at best average defensively then Blake needs to play. Especially with Brandon since Roy has regressed defensively this season.

I don't like it. It hurts to watch. But right now Blake is the best option at Point Guard.

Though in all honesty I think that says a whole lot more about Bayless and Miller then it does about Blake.
 
RR7 said:
Which looks good when you use multiple games that all fall into that, but as was mentioned earlier, if you are subbed in and out of a game and end up with 5 separate stints on the floor, there is the possibility you can have a horrendous stint, where you have 5 TOs, couple of missed shots, poor defense, and you could have a -25 for that one bad stint. Then, then next 4 stints you play, your team can be +1 each time. For the game, your +/- is -21, but your win% is 80%. That doesn't reflect what actually happened on the court. Sure, you "won" those 4 stints. What if one of those stints was for 15 seconds at the end of a quarter, and you stand in the corner while your star isos on top, and gets a layup? Well, you "won" that stint. So 100% win. But what did you contribute? Likewise, a defender covering you in that same stint covers you out on the perimiter, adn another man gets beat for a layup. He gets a loss, but didn't negatively effect the team.
Click to expand...

Again, this is all very nice and true, but for large samples - these things will "smooth" out and a pretty reliable picture will come out. That's the gist of statistics everywhere and every-time.

The fact is that we have a pretty large sample size for Blake's win% - and he seems to be a good performer in Portland and in Denver. This is not taking a single game and making an argument. Once the data is there (and it is, for Blake) - I think there is something there that might not be easy to detect for the untrained eye.
 
andalusian said:
Again, this is all very nice and true, but for large samples - these things will "smooth" out and a pretty reliable picture will come out. That's the gist of statistics everywhere and every-time.

The fact is that we have a pretty large sample size for Blake's win% - and he seems to be a good performer in Portland and in Denver. This is not taking a single game and making an argument. Once the data is there (and it is, for Blake) - I think there is something there that might not be easy to detect for the untrained eye.
Click to expand...

and once again, the players he is compared to on the team don't have an adequate sample size to compare against him. How would Bayless fair if he got those minutes? Well we don't know because he never gets in the game.
 
How does synergy show Blake as the best option at PG? It shows his PPP on defense at .73, and Bayless' at .87.

However, on offense, Bayless is at 1.06 PPP, and Blake is .85. A +/- PPP of .19 for Bayless, and .12 for Blake.

I'm curious, does anyone know how synergy does their rankings and ratings? The excellent ratings in pick and roll, or isolation or whatever. How does it quantify PnR defense? If Blake switches off of his man, and the PG scores, does that go against Joel, or Greg? Or, if Miller switches off of his man, and the C scores, or PF, does that go on Miller? Anyone know?
 
KingSpeed said:
Thanks. It certainly explains why our coaching staff likes to have Blake on the floor as much as possible.
Click to expand...

Blake plays with the starting lineup most of the time. Pairing him with BRoy and LMA...Of course his win percentage would be high..There is no arguing Miller is a much better point guard than Blake. I would even go to say that Miller right now is better than Blake was in his prime (whenever that was).
 
You can argue in favor of Blake all you want. There are folks who love "Blakey" and are in his camp. There are folks like me who hate "BLANKY". Argue all you want, you won't convince me. Steve Blake has been in the league long enough to show who he is and what kind of a player he is. IMO he is a backup. You may disagree. Throw up all the stats you want, you won't convince me of anything.
 
andalusian said:
We have had this discussion earlier - and we noticed that if you look at Blake's win% over the last 4 or so years (including when playing in Denver next to 'Melo and AI) - you will notice that he is usually among the win% leaders on teams with good players.

This tells me that something he does helps good players play well when he is on the court next to them.

This, to me, shows that he is a better player to have on a team with good players, as a glue guy, than people give him the credit for.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
hasoos said:
It's real simple folks. This is just another way of stating the +/- stat. This stat is more related to the players and unit you are playing with than how you play yourself.
Click to expand...

Then why is Blake's win percentage better than Roy's?
 
hasoos said:
You can argue in favor of Blake all you want. There are folks who love "Blakey" and are in his camp. There are folks like me who hate "BLANKY". Argue all you want, you won't convince me. Steve Blake has been in the league long enough to show who he is and what kind of a player he is. IMO he is a backup. You may disagree. Throw up all the stats you want, you won't convince me of anything.
Click to expand...

Well, that seems like a reasonable position. :sigh:

Facts be damned, I'm sticking to my over-the-top opinion!
 
blue32 said:
Lol I love how you constantly defend (w/skewed reasoning and stats) the crappiest players on our team....

Last year and this year ('till injury) it was Outlaw

This year, Blake....

What gives man? Outlaw (while being alright) isn't what you make him out to be (your messiah, or maybe just fantasy) and Blake (this year),he sucks, hes useless out on the court. The only reason why he gets any positive ratings is because he's playing with the starters.
Click to expand...

I hate how you trash certain players because you don't like them. Travis isn't crappy. He is recognized around the league as one of the better sixth men. You may not like his shot selection but his shooting percentage the past couple years has been good and shows he has put a lot of effort into improving his game. And his defense has improved and his length disrupts the opposition. He's a valuable piece of this team.

Travis is far from the crappiest player on the team.
 
Wow, so OT, but was just looking at other team's win%. Gasol is at 100% right now. That's amazing. And last season, Fisher's was slightly higher than Kobe's. Does that make Fisher more valubale, or important? Is he making a huge difference on the team overall?
 
hasoos said:
You can argue in favor of Blake all you want. There are folks who love "Blakey" and are in his camp. There are folks like me who hate "BLANKY". Argue all you want, you won't convince me. Steve Blake has been in the league long enough to show who he is and what kind of a player he is. IMO he is a backup. You may disagree. Throw up all the stats you want, you won't convince me of anything.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You're biased against Blake regardless of what he does to help the team.
 
hasoos said:
and once again, the players he is compared to on the team don't have an adequate sample size to compare against him. How would Bayless fair if he got those minutes? Well we don't know because he never gets in the game.
Click to expand...

That is a fair question. My only implication is that to say that Blake is worthless is silly and goes against pretty substantial evidence.

I would love to see JB get more burn.
 
RR7 said:
Wow, so OT, but was just looking at other team's win%. Gasol is at 100% right now. That's amazing. And last season, Fisher's was slightly higher than Kobe's. Does that make Fisher more valubale, or important? Is he making a huge difference on the team overall?
Click to expand...

It means Fisher is another "glue" guy. There was a thread about this a few weeks ago. He doesn't need the ball to be effective, but his contributions don't show up completely in the stats. Incomplete players who know their roles, for some reason, are the object of constant crticism on this board.
 
roydezlaw said:
I hate how you trash certain players because you don't like them. Travis isn't crappy. He is recognized around the league as one of the better sixth men. You may not like his shot selection but his shooting percentage the past couple years has been good and shows he has put a lot of effort into improving his game. And his defense has improved and his length disrupts the opposition. He's a valuable piece of this team.

Travis is far from the crappiest player on the team.
Click to expand...



I never said I didn't like Outlaw, where did I say that? I actually like him and wish he would do good. He however is one of the most inconsistent players we have besides Martel Webster. IMO, for someone that's been around as long as he has on our team, should be playing better, and I feel that his play last year was "Crappy", and I feel that his play this year was "Crappy" too.

If he doesn't offer us instant offense, then he does nothing for us.

Same with Blake. If his shot doesn't fall, he does nothing else for us.

The two players are bench quality players; and unfortunately our team (and Kingspeed ;)) treats them like they are integral pieces of our club.

Once Bayless or Miller start above Blake, and once Cunningham gets over the rookie jitters, I totally expect them to take over Blake and Outlaw's spots. And we'll be a better team for it.
 
RR7 said:
Wow, so OT, but was just looking at other team's win%. Gasol is at 100% right now. That's amazing. And last season, Fisher's was slightly higher than Kobe's. Does that make Fisher more valubale, or important? Is he making a huge difference on the team overall?
Click to expand...

Exactly. The Lakers got much MUCH better when those two joined the team. The season before, the Lakers got bounced in the first round. Who hit the big threes to win Game 4 of the NBA Finals? And who was a leader in the locker room after that game? Fisher is VERY valuable to that team. It doesn't mean that Fisher is a better player than Kobe but that he makes his teammates better.
 
C_note said:
You all are looking at this topic from the wrong angles. Almost all of Blake's minutes come with Roy AND Aldridge in at the same time....IRONICALLY 71.4 % OF BLAKES PLAYING TIME IS WITH ROY AND ALDRIDGE ON THE FLOOR!!!!

http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusm...omb=3&season=22009&split=9&team=Trail Blazers


/end thread
Click to expand...

That still doesn't account for Blake's higher win% compared to Roy and LMA. Just because the numbers are the same doesn't mean they are measuring the same data.

/open thread
 
RR7 said:
Then why, outside of Scola, does Battier have the lowest win% on his team. 45%! That's terrible.
Click to expand...

Good question. Perhaps the people pining for Battier to come to the Blazers should reconsider their stance.
 
PapaG said:
That still doesn't account for Blake's higher win% compared to Roy and LMA. Just because the numbers are the same doesn't mean they are measuring the same data.

/open thread
Click to expand...

Pretty sure if I went to go check overall minutes played, Roy and Aldridge would be higher than Blake...they are forced to play with others on the team as well and don't get the benefit of playing pretty much exclusively with the team's two best players like Blake does...

/re-end thread
 
RR7 said:
Wow, so OT, but was just looking at other team's win%. Gasol is at 100% right now. That's amazing. And last season, Fisher's was slightly higher than Kobe's. Does that make Fisher more valubale, or important? Is he making a huge difference on the team overall?
Click to expand...

I agree with you--this is "so OT". I don't think anyone would argue that Fisher is more valuable or important than Kobe, and I haven't seen anyone in this thread arguing that Blake is better than Roy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

andalusian
Maybe Blake needs to play more
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
andalusian
andalusian
L
Is Houston really less of a jump shooting team then Portland?
Replies
20
Views
1K
Ed O
Ed O
bbwSwish
Steve Blake's Mistakes
Replies
11
Views
2K
MARIS61
MARIS61
S
Sergio v Blake (in numbers)
Replies
8
Views
845
1 Eye Jack
1 Eye Jack
BlazerCaravan
Our best lineups
Replies
0
Views
290
BlazerCaravan
BlazerCaravan

Users who are viewing this thread

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