Fire Stotts Eventually (1 Viewer)

[riverman]

The reason ratings are so fickle is that they don't really account for bench development and sacrificing numbers for experience..you put in bottom of the bench guys that lose a lead and your DRTG goes to hell....if the other team waives the flag and puts in garbage rosters often ...your DTRG goes to hell but what you do get is to see your rookies learn to get up to speed even though you beat a team 120 -113 instead of 145-98.....and you also sacrifice ratings by resting your best players when you don't need them on the court....Nas couldn't really shoot at all last game but Stotts left him out there...that doesn't make Stotts a bad coach...it makes him a coach that'll develop his rookie...intangibles....games look closer on scoreboards than they often are.

 

[Tince]

It correlates to winning for us. We're 8-0 this year when we have more than 25 assists. 13-14 when we have less than 25.

We're 29th in DRTG. If you dont think defensive quality correlates with winning and losing, then you're more far gone than I thought.

You make this too easy.

1) Your sample size is still no where near valid.
2) FGM are also up in our wins. Are the made field goals increased because of the assists or are the assists up because of the made field goals? The important number would be precentage of shots that would've counted as assists. You'd also need to factor in the quality of opponent as that could also have an impact on assisted attempts given up. This is the problem picking one team, who played 35 games vs 30 teams over 10 seasons.

You realize the irony in your claiming us being 29th in DRTG as proof that it correlates to winning because we're 8th in the league in wins with that rating. But again, 1 team playing half a season is not a statisically valid data set. Statistically valid data sets and correlation are two things that you continue to struggle to grasp.

 

[Tince]

I've provided examples repeatedly and you don't have any.

So your premise is kind of thrown out the window.

You can try to fill in the gaps but you're not very effective at it.

You haven't provide ANY examples of apples to apples comparisons. Not one. i would love if you did because that would answer my original question

 

[Sheldon Shape]

You haven't provide ANY examples of apples to apples comparisons. Not one.

First you took issue with me suggesting that NBA front offices have more credibility with sportswriters.

Then, you tried to provide a really poor example.

Now you're saying I haven't provided any apples to apples comparison.

You showed me one season where Stotts got some votes by the coaches association or something but didn't disclose where he was ranked. One season. No information as to how many votes he got.

Olshey has been ranked in the top 5 of the GMs MULTIPLE YEARS by his peers. I have provided multiple examples and there others I didn't take the time to post because I already proved that Olshey is better at his job than Stotts.

What are you not understanding?

 

[Tince]

First you took issue with me suggesting that NBA front offices have more credibility with sportswriters.

Then, you tried to provide a really poor example.

Now you're saying I haven't provided any apples to apples comparison.

You showed me one season where Stotts got some votes by the coaches association or something but didn't disclose where he was ranked. One season. No information as to how many votes he got.

Olshey has been ranked in the top 5 of the GMs MULTIPLE YEARS by his peers. I have provided multiple examples and there others I didn't take the time to post because I already proved that Olshey is better at his job than Stotts.

What are you not understanding?

For the 2nd time. I did not take issue with you suggesting front offices have more credibility. I took issue with you saying Olshey got votes in an award voting on by front offices and the Coach of the Year isn't voted on by front offices, so that doesn't count.

The issue wasn't that the COTY doesn't count for you, it's that you didn't provided something on equal footing that did count. The only logical apples to apples thing would be the same voting body who voted on Executive of the Year and COTY.

So in review: You made a claim that Person A > Person B, despite them being in totally different positions, and provided no apples to apples comparison to back it up. That's all I'm asking for.

If I come out and say Person B > Person A, then the burden of proof would be on me. I would never make a claim that our athletic trainer is way better than our ticket sales manager or our backup center because there is no way to make a fair comparison between them.

 

[BonesJones]

1) Your sample size is still no where near valid.
2) FGM are also up in our wins. Are the made field goals increased because of the assists or are the assists up because of the made field goals? The important number would be precentage of shots that would've counted as assists. You'd also need to factor in the quality of opponent as that could also have an impact on assisted attempts given up. This is the problem picking one team, who played 35 games vs 30 teams over 10 seasons.

You realize the irony in your claiming us being 29th in DRTG as proof that it correlates to winning because we're 8th in the league in wins with that rating. But again, 1 team playing half a season is not a statisically valid data set. Statistically valid data sets and correlation are two things that you continue to struggle to grasp.

Were 8th in wins because we've won a lot of close games against bad teams due to Dame's heroics, which is reflected by the fact that we have a negative point differential despite being 7 games above .500.

But if you think that defensive quality doesnt matter in regards to winning, that's hilarious.

Also, these stats arent based on half a season. They've been in this range across multiple seasons. But yes, talk about how you value data, then decry any set of data that you dont like.

How pathetic is it that your argument is that ball movement and defense dont matter. No wonder you like Stotts.

As far as your 2nd point, YOURE the one who said assists dont correlate with winning. That was your argument. Move the goalposts, but for anyone who knows what they're watching, its obvious this team gets better shots and scores the ball easier if they move the ball.

 

[BonesJones]

First you took issue with me suggesting that NBA front offices have more credibility with sportswriters.

Then, you tried to provide a really poor example.

Now you're saying I haven't provided any apples to apples comparison.

You showed me one season where Stotts got some votes by the coaches association or something but didn't disclose where he was ranked. One season. No information as to how many votes he got.

Olshey has been ranked in the top 5 of the GMs MULTIPLE YEARS by his peers. I have provided multiple examples and there others I didn't take the time to post because I already proved that Olshey is better at his job than Stotts.

What are you not understanding?

This guys all over the place and so blatantly biased that its impossible to have a reasonable conversation with him.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

For the 2nd time. I did not take issue with you suggesting front offices have more credibility. I took issue with you saying Olshey got votes in an award voting on by front offices and the Coach of the Year isn't voted on by front offices, so that doesn't count.

Even if it did, Olshey still wins. lol You're bonkers, dude.

The issue wasn't that the COTY doesn't count for you, it's that you didn't provided something on equal footing that did count. The only logical apples to apples thing would be the same voting body who voted on Executive of the Year and COTY.

You're making this about me because you can't make it about Stotts. I showed that Olshey is better at his job and you can't respond so you spend your time on me. Unfortunate.

So in review: You made a claim that Person A > Person B, despite them being in totally different positions, and provided no apples to apples comparison to back it up. That's all I'm asking for.

The point is that even if was apples to apples, Olshey still wins and makes my argument true.

If I come out and say Person B > Person A, then the burden of proof would be on me. I would never make a claim that our athletic trainer is way better than our ticket sales manager or our backup center because there is no way to make a fair comparison between them.

Insufferable. Take your L and move on.

 

[Tince]

Were 8th in wins because we've won a lot of close games against bad teams due to Dame's heroics, which is reflected by the fact that we have a negative point differential despite being 7 games above .500.

But if you think that defensive quality doesnt matter in regards to winning, that's hilarious.

Also, these stats arent based on half a season. They've been in this range across multiple seasons. But yes, talk about how you value data, then decry any set of data that you dont like.

How pathetic is it that your argument is that ball movement and defense dont matter. No wonder you like Stotts.

As far as your 2nd point, YOURE the one who said assists dont correlate with winning. That was your argument. Move the goalposts, but for anyone who knows what they're watching, its obvious this team gets better shots and scores the ball easier if they move the ball.

Did I say defensive quality doesn't matter? No. Again, you're having to twist things when you don't have data. I actually think there is a correlation between defensive rating and winning. I also think the correlationship between offensive rating and winning is stronger. Actually, I don't think either, the data would back that up.

If greater ball movement led to more wins, why don't teams try to make as many passes as possible each possession? Why don't assists correlate to wins? What don't # of passes per game correlate to wins? It's scary that you're holding so strong to your beliefs, that even in the face of data, you refuse to accept it. Though, I guess a lot of people in our country are having those same struggles.

 

[Tince]

Even if it did, Olshey still wins. lol You're bonkers, dude.

I guess you're not going to provide anything to back it up your personal belief, just more comments about me, and not the subject.

Geoff Clark >>> Neil Olshey. Prove me wrong!

 

[Sheldon Shape]

I guess you're not going to provide anything to back it up your personal belief, just more comments about me, and not the subject.

Geoff Clark >>> Neil Olshey. Prove me wrong!

Projection much?

 

[Tince]

Projection much?

"You're bonkers", "Insufferable" "Leave your info below in case any NBA franchises want to hire you."

 

[BonesJones]

Did I say defensive quality doesn't matter? No. Again, you're having to twist things when you don't have data. I actually think there is a correlation between defensive rating and winning. I also think the correlationship between offensive rating and winning is stronger. Actually, I don't think either, the data would back that up.

If greater ball movement led to more wins, why don't teams try to make as many passes as possible each possession? Why don't assists correlate to wins? What don't # of passes per game correlate to wins? It's scary that you're holding so strong to your beliefs, that even in the face of data, you refuse to accept it. Though, I guess a lot of people in our country are having those same struggles.

Holy shit this is ridiculous. I brought up their 29th ranked defense (BASED ON DRTG) , and you responded with:

"If you have a stat where Portland is 29th in league that also has a strong correlation to wins, please provide it."

Now you're saying I'm the one not accepting data? Lmfao.

Other than that, are you seriously saying "if ball movement matters, why dont teams make as many possible"? That's one of the most disingenuous things you've ever said. You're ridiculous. I'm out.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

"You're bonkers", "Insufferable" "Leave your info below in case any NBA franchises want to hire you."

Now I understand why you've been blocked by so many members here. I will do the same.

 

[Tince]

This guys all over the place and so blatantly biased that its impossible to have a reasonable conversation with him.

I am biased towards the Blazers, I've said that many times. You are also bias, but just refuse to admit it.

 

[Tince]

Now I understand why you've been blocked by so many members here. I will do the same.

How many members have blocked me? Same number of people who voted for Olshey for executive of the year?

 

[Tince]

Holy shit this is ridiculous. I brought up their 29th ranked defense (BASED ON DRTG) , and you responded with:

"If you have a stat where Portland is 29th in league that also has a strong correlation to wins, please provide it."

Now you're saying I'm the one not accepting data? Lmfao.

Other than that, are you seriously saying "if ball movement matters, why dont teams make as many possible"? That's one of the most disingenuous things you've ever said. You're ridiculous. I'm out.

Correlation 101: There is a difference between strong correlation, correlation, weak correlation, no correlation, negative correlation. Defensive rating does NOT have a strong correlation. It does have a correlation though. Higher than assists, lower than offensive rating and many other measures.

Probably a good time for you to waive the white flag anyway. I will not call you ridiculous or question your basketball resume after a take I think is wrong; not my style.

 

[BonesJones]

Correlation 101: There is a difference between strong correlation, correlation, weak correlation, no correlation, negative correlation. Defensive rating does NOT have a strong correlation. It does have a correlation though. Higher than assists, lower than offensive rating and many other measures.

Probably a good time for you to waive the white flag anyway. I will not call you ridiculous or question your basketball resume after a take I think is wrong; not my style.

Basketball 101: You need to take it

 

[Sheldon Shape]

Holy shit this is ridiculous. I brought up their 29th ranked defense (BASED ON DRTG) , and you responded with:

"If you have a stat where Portland is 29th in league that also has a strong correlation to wins, please provide it."

Now you're saying I'm the one not accepting data? Lmfao.

Other than that, are you seriously saying "if ball movement matters, why dont teams make as many possible"? That's one of the most disingenuous things you've ever said. You're ridiculous. I'm out.

I had to put him on ignore. Finally. I've burned too much time on people gaslighting and making bad faith arguments.

 

[BonesJones]

I had to put him on ignore. Finally. I've burned too much time on people gaslighting and making bad faith arguments.

Yup. There are a couple people in here who make legitimate basketball arguments as to why they like Stotts and I respect it and can have a conversation with them. Tince, not so much.

 

[Tince]

Yup. There are a couple people in here who make legitimate basketball arguments as to why they like Stotts and I respect it and can have a conversation with them. Tince, not so much.

You should tell those people they have your respect and admiration. It would be off brand, but a great change pace, and certainly the highlight of their day. I have zero dislike for you even when we disagree, for the record.

 

[BonesJones]

You should tell those people they have your respect and admiration. It would be off brand, but a great change pace, and certainly the highlight of their day. I have zero dislike for you even when we disagree, for the record.

I have zero dislike for you personally. The way you argue on the other hand...

 

[Tince]

I have zero dislike for you personally. The way you argue on the other hand...

I respect that, I can get under peoples skin when trying to make a point.

I just wanted to make sure you knew it wasn't personal; I even admire the time you put into your craft even if I think what you're saying is often very flawed. You've challenged the way I think many times, I hope you continue to do so!

 

[kjironman1]

You do know there is a search feature on this site right?

I used it to search Bjorkgren. Not one single mention of his name prior to being named head coach of the Pacers.

Too bad you have to lie.

Call me a liar and it takes me two fucking seconds to bring it up.

Hoops you used to actually be a decent poster here.

Pacers Hire Nate Bjorkgren As Head Coach
12:42pm: The Pacers have made it official, announcing the hire of Bjorkgren in a press release.

“We are very pleased and excited to have Nate as our new coach,” Pacers president of basketball operations Kevin Pritchard said in a statement. “This was an extensive and thorough search, and when we reached the conclusion, we felt strongly Nate is the right coach for us at the right time. He comes from a winning background, has experienced championship success, is innovative and his communication skills along with his positivity are tremendous. We all look forward to a long, successful partnership in helping the Pacers move forward.”https://www.hoopsrumors.com/

Sorry... You lose again.

 

[kjironman1]

You do know there is a search feature on this site right?

I used it to search Bjorkgren. Not one single mention of his name prior to being named head coach of the Pacers.

Too bad you have to lie.

Here is the story we were reading when it happened.
Like i said. This move was talked about.
Multiple posters posted about the move.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...rkgren-head-coach-toronto-raptors/5992524002/

 

[hoopsjock]

Call me a liar and it takes me two fucking seconds to bring it up.

Hoops you used to actually be a decent poster here.


Sorry... You lose again.

What in the world are you trying to say? You posted that there were tons of discussions about him prior to being hired. You posted a story of him being hired.

What in the fuck KJ?

 

[kjironman1]

What in the world are you trying to say? You posted that there were tons of discussions about him prior to being hired. You posted a story of him being hired.

What in the fuck KJ?

I'm sorry Hoops. This whole thing is outta line.
I didn't mean to try to do anything but converse with you.
I'm gonna let this go because it ain't going anywhere.

You are right. Nobody knew anything about anyone being hired and most of all STOTTS SUCKS!
I can live with your opinion.
Have a good night.

 

[wizenheimer]

Correlation 101: There is a difference between strong correlation, correlation, weak correlation, no correlation, negative correlation. Defensive rating does NOT have a strong correlation. It does have a correlation though. Higher than assists, lower than offensive rating and many other measures.

there is a very strong correlation between NBA champions and defensive rating. I listed the last 20 champions in a post a while back, and IIRC, 18 of 20 were in the top-10 in defensive rating, and one of the teams that wasn't ranked 11th; and the other was 20 years ago. I believe about half, or more, of the 18 teams in the top-10 were actually in the top-5

I would imagine there's likely be an equivalent correlation of offensive rating, I haven't checked it

maybe the real correlation is that elite teams are almost always great on both ends of the floor

 

[Tince]

there is a very strong correlation between NBA champions and defensive rating. I listed the last 20 champions in a post a while back, and IIRC, 18 of 20 were in the top-10 in defensive rating, and one of the teams that wasn't ranked 11th; and the other was 20 years ago. I believe about half, or more, of the 18 teams in the top-10 were actually in the top-5

I would imagine there's likely be an equivalent correlation of offensive rating, I haven't checked it

maybe the real correlation is that elite teams are almost always great on both ends of the floor

100% believe what you're saying as the data I've seen says there is a correlation. Curious what you mean by strong correlation though. Did you take a rank range (top 10, top 5) and match it against champions? Look at all the champions defensive rating and find the mean/median? Would love to see how that spreads out to finals teams, conference finals teams, playoff teams, etc.

I'll have to find the most recent data set I saw, but it did have a stronger (not strong) correlation to offensive rating and wins (not championships) than defensive rating did. The weighted combination true shooting percentage, rebound rate, turnover rate, and free throw rate seem to give you by far the highest correlation.

 

[blazerkor]

Wait a minute... did this shit just become about who is worse at their job... Olshey or Stotts? Why the fuck does it matter? They have both been doing it for what will be a decade if they don't get fired this off season and haven't gotten us anywhere. Olshey goes first and then the knew GM will fire Stotts. This isn't rocket science. Both guys do some things well. Both guys are respected around the league. But both guys get the blame for not having got it done for damn near a decade. That's it.

What I'm seeing is... "Stotts is less mediocre" "No Olshey is less mediocre" Who the fuck cares? They are both mediocre and our franchise should try and get better. We might not get better but we have to try. If you consistently come in right in the middle of the pack for nine years, you have to change it up. If either guy wanted to save their job they should have had the other fired sooner.

Unless we make a run better than we have in the past, which means being competitive in the conference finals... both guys have got to go.