Good and Bad News on Turner

[illmatic99]

I mean the team had 29 assists last game. I know it's just one game but it suggests passing might not be an issue.

The other thing is it's harder for other players to get assists when Turner is in the game because he can't hit a jump shot, even when left wide open, and the spacing is worse because of it when Kanter is already down low.

This is a great point. The two lobs he throws to Jake every game shouldn't cloud the fact that our spacing is miserable with him and we actually passed the ball better without him.

 

[andalusian]

worse, is his turnover rate. His assist-rate/turnover-rate ratio is 1.25. Dame's is 2.63 and he's no wizard at protecting the ball. For chrissakes, Nurkic's ratio is 1.23 and he gets called for lots of screen fouls. When your 2nd best offensive facilitator is at the same level as Nurkic in play-making efficiency there's an issue

Where did you get these numbers and why do you do a ratio of a (ratio to ratio)? If it is based on bball-ref numbers - you are using different populations- the ast% is based on possessions when he was on the floor even if he did not touch the ball, while tov% is per 100 possessions - you can try to normalize it using his usg% and do it for everyone else you want to compare him to, but a simpler solution is to do his direct ast/tov ratio - espn provides this data:

http://www.espn.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/por/table/game/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/dir/desc

Based on this data that uses the same population directly used by the player - his ast/to is actually best on the team when we ignore Rodny Hood's small sample size

 

[BonesJones]

That is an opinion and not a fact. Why are facts and opinions so hard for some of you to understand? A fact would be, Turner averages 23.3 mpg this year.

The fact that you don't understand how stats can easily show a players positive or negative impact on the floor is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[CupWizier]

The fact that you don't understand how stats can easily show a players positive or negative impact on the floor is absolutely ridiculous.

That's not a fact.

 

[BonesJones]

Where did you get these numbers and why do you do a ratio of a (ratio to ratio)? If it is based on bball-ref numbers - you are using different populations- the ast% is based on possessions when he was on the floor even if he did not touch the ball, while tov% is per 100 possessions - you can try to normalize it using his usg% and do it for everyone else you want to compare him to, but a simpler solution is to do his direct ast/tov ratio - espn provides this data:

http://www.espn.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/por/table/game/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/dir/desc

Based on this data that uses the same population directly used by the player - his ast/to is actually best on the team when we ignore Rodny Hood's small sample size

Shit, I trusted Wizenheimer...

 

[BonesJones]

That's not a fact.

It is. Fact: You think that there cant be factual evidence (stats) that shows a player hurts his team when he's in the floor.

 

[illmatic99]

Where did you get these numbers and why do you do a ratio of a (ratio to ratio)? If it is based on bball-ref numbers - you are using different populations- the ast% is based on possessions when he was on the floor even if he did not touch the ball, while tov% is per 100 possessions - you can try to normalize it using his usg% and do it for everyone else you want to compare him to, but a simpler solution is to do his direct ast/tov ratio - espn provides this data:

http://www.espn.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/por/table/game/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/dir/desc

Based on this data that uses the same population directly used by the player - his ast/to is actually best on the team when we ignore Rodny Hood's small sample size

He has the best ast/to ratio as well as the best ast ratio on the team. Still think we make too much of this number while ignoring his overall impact.

 

[BonesJones]

You are looking very desperate for an argument with me. Ain't gonna happen kid.

I see your post was edited by a moderator. So you insulted me after complaining about people insulting you. Ironic.

Im literally just one of many people who are in the process of calling your posting style. Trying to find that magic number that'll make it click.

 

[BonesJones]

He has the best ast/to ratio as well as the best ast ratio on the team. Still think we make too much of this number while ignoring his overall impact.

Yup. There are much better stats that cover the broader picture and a players overall impact, compared to a stat in isolation looking only at aymaking efficiency.

 

[hoopsjock]

Where did you get these numbers and why do you do a ratio of a (ratio to ratio)? If it is based on bball-ref numbers - you are using different populations- the ast% is based on possessions when he was on the floor even if he did not touch the ball, while tov% is per 100 possessions - you can try to normalize it using his usg% and do it for everyone else you want to compare him to, but a simpler solution is to do his direct ast/tov ratio - espn provides this data:

http://www.espn.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/por/table/game/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/dir/desc

Based on this data that uses the same population directly used by the player - his ast/to is actually best on the team when we ignore Rodny Hood's small sample size

The Hood thing is interesting to me. Since Turner was out last game Hood actually initiated the offense a few times including being the ball handler on the pick and roll. Like you mentioned it was a small sample size but he made some really nice passes out of it and I also trust him more pulling up from about 15 feet if that is what the defense gives him. When Turner runs the pick and roll the defense can just sag off.

I think it's worth exploring the way some players seem to become better passers in Stotts' offense. We've seen it now with Nurk and Plumlee. Even Kanter had 4 assists last game. I think having several players that can make decent passes and can also shoot is better than having a guy who can't shoot dominate the ball.

 

[wizenheimer]

Where did you get these numbers and why do you do a ratio of a (ratio to ratio)? If it is based on bball-ref numbers - you are using different populations- the ast% is based on possessions when he was on the floor even if he did not touch the ball, while tov% is per 100 possessions - you can try to normalize it using his usg% and do it for everyone else you want to compare him to, but a simpler solution is to do his direct ast/tov ratio - espn provides this data:

http://www.espn.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/por/table/game/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/dir/desc

Based on this data that uses the same population directly used by the player - his ast/to is actually best on the team when we ignore Rodny Hood's small sample size

first, the numbers are from bbref

as to why...read what I was responding too: somebody else used Turner's assist rate in an argument. I replied, staying with that argument and that stat, and added turnover rate...two fairly linked stats, I'd say. Now, those rates are team rates while the player is on the floor

 

[wizenheimer]

Here's another fact. He makes our team worse when he plays over guys like CJ/Seth/Moe/Jake.

His net rating is 8th on the team at +0.7. The only ones worse are Hood (+0.3), Collins (-1.0), Leonard (-3.3), Kanter (-10.9), followed by the rookies. Hood and Kanter don't have nearly the sample size as the rest of our rotation.

Jake's is +3.2. Moe is at +4.0. CJ at +5.3. Seth at +5.5.

It's not just this year, Turner was 12th on our team in net rating last year, and 14th the year prior. He sucks and he makes our team worse. He plays because of his salary and some cooked up image Terry has of him as a good defender and veteran leader. I don't buy it.

adding to that:

PER:

Enes Kanter 33.8 Damian Lillard 23.7 Jusuf Nurkic 23.3 CJ McCollum 16.7 Meyers Leonard 16.2 Jake Layman 15.5 Al-Farouq Aminu 13.6 Zach Collins 13.6 Rodney Hood 11.8 Maurice Harkless 11.3 Evan Turner 11.3 Seth Curry 9.6

TS:

Meyers Leonard .676 Enes Kanter .652 Jake Layman .627 Rodney Hood .603 Damian Lillard .588 Al-Farouq Aminu .583 Seth Curry .575 Zach Collins .570 Jusuf Nurkic .567 CJ McCollum .545 Maurice Harkless .530 Evan Turner .498

winshares/48:

Enes Kanter .312 Damian Lillard .198 Jusuf Nurkic .188 Meyers Leonard .167 Jake Layman .134 Al-Farouq Aminu .133 Rodney Hood .112 Zach Collins .111 CJ McCollum .104 Maurice Harkless .092 Seth Curry .066 Evan Turner .053

Box Plus/Minus:

Enes Kanter 6.5 Jusuf Nurkic 5.4 Damian Lillard 5.2 Meyers Leonard 1.7 Al-Farouq Aminu 1.3 Maurice Harkless 1.0 Jake Layman 0.8 Zach Collins 0.3 CJ McCollum -0.1 Rodney Hood -1.0 Seth Curry -1.9 Evan Turner -2.0

value over replacement:

Damian Lillard 3.7 Jusuf Nurkic 2.9 Al-Farouq Aminu 1.4 CJ McCollum 0.9 Meyers Leonard 0.7 Maurice Harkless 0.6 Jake Layman 0.6 Zach Collins 0.6 Enes Kanter 0.1 Rodney Hood 0.0 Seth Curry 0.0 Evan Turner 0.0

it's a clean sweep for Turner. He's also last on the team in Real Plus/Minus; in fact, he ranks 461st out of 492 NBA players in RPM at -3.62....yikes!

it's one thing when just an isolated stat shows something. That could be statistical noise or an outlier or an aberration. But when an entire set of gauges measuring impact and efficiency of production all show the same thing, you have to at least consider those numbers are painting an accurate picture

 

[CupWizier]

It is. Fact: You think that there cant be factual evidence (stats) that shows a player hurts his team when he's in the floor.

NEVER did I say that or allude to that.

The facts are the numbers such as player A averages 10ppg. That's a fact. Saying he plays because he averages 10ppg is an opinion. Do you seriously not understand the difference? A fact can be proven and opinions may or may not be able to be proven and depending on information used to form an opinion helps determine how valid ones opinion is.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

We really have nothing better to do than bicker over what other people claimed was fact or opinion? Really??

Come on guys--and I mean ALL of you--let's act a little more maturely please?

 

[hoopsjock]

We really have nothing better to do than bicker over what other people claimed was fact or opinion? Really??

Come on guys--and I mean ALL of you--let's act a little more maturely please?

Is that a fact or just your opinion?

 

[illmatic99]

We really have nothing better to do than bicker over what other people claimed was fact or opinion? Really??

Come on guys--and I mean ALL of you--let's act a little more maturely please?

I think it's an unequivocal fact by pretty much any measure that ET is one of our worst players. What's wrong in pointing that out?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Is that a fact or just your opinion?

You may notice that I only asked questions, stating neither fact nor opinion.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I think it's an unequivocal fact by pretty much any measure that ET is one of our worst players. What's wrong in pointing that out?

Nothing. I also think that some are of the opinion that there are ways in which Turner brings value that defy measure.

 

[TBpup]

You may notice that I only asked questions, stating neither fact nor opinion.

Vulcans like facts.

 

[illmatic99]

Nothing. I also think that some are of the opinion that there are ways in which Turner brings value that defy measure.

I dunno, man. Watching him play makes me want to gouge my eyes out. Can't wait for that dumbass contract to expire. It was fine that he played before, but we have alternatives now. And hell, even Terry's realizing it. His minutes are trending down.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I dunno, man. Watching him play makes me want to gouge my eyes out. Can't wait for that dumbass contract to expire. It was fine that he played before, but we have alternatives now. And hell, even Terry's realizing it. His minutes are trending down.

Stotts isn't completely intractable, but he sure does adapt slowly. Like turning an aircraft carrier.

Going forward, I think I'm going to refer to him as "The USS Terry".

 

[CupWizier]

I think it's an unequivocal fact by pretty much any measure that ET is one of our worst players. What's wrong in pointing that out?

What's wrong with a differing opinion? That's what I find so hilarious is how some of you seem to think your opinions are the only ones that matter and get bent out of shape with differing opinions.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Nothing. I also think that some are of the opinion that there are ways in which Turner brings value that defy measure.

The irrefutable intangibles argument.

 

[oldmangrouch]

What's wrong with a differing opinion? That's what I find so hilarious is how some of you seem to think your opinions are the only ones that matter and get bent out of shape with differing opinions.

If I say nobody here is immune from that mistake, is that a fact or an opinion?

 

[CupWizier]

If I say nobody here is immune from that mistake, is that a fact or an opinion?

opinion.

 

[oldmangrouch]

You may notice that I only asked questions, stating neither fact nor opinion.

But are not the questions themselves based on a set of assumptions and a particular, unique view of reality?

 

[illmatic99]

But are not the questions themselves based on a set of assumptions and a particular, unique view of reality?

Anyone else have a flashback to Seinfeld?

 

[oldmangrouch]

opinion.

I would prefer to call it a theory.

 

[CupWizier]

I would prefer to call it a theory.

You can do that as opinion is a synonym of theory.

 

[andalusian]

first, the numbers are from bbref

as to why...read what I was responding too: somebody else used Turner's assist rate in an argument. I replied, staying with that argument and that stat, and added turnover rate...two fairly linked stats, I'd say. Now, those rates are team rates while the player is on the floor

As shown above - the values are not linked for the same population based on bbref's definition - so it is a pretty misleading number (as shown by the simple ast/to ratio from ESPN).

I spend a lot of my time in recent months working on a complex BI project - and I have been reminded almost daily that understanding the basis of how the numbers are calculated is important, unfortunately, in this example - your answer was misleading because the populations are different.