Good and Bad News on Turner

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
andalusian said:
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.
Click to expand...

if you want to argue that turnover rate is misleading, somehow, go ahead. But keep in mind the turnover rates for the entire team:

Evan Turner 18.2 (16.4)
Jusuf Nurkic 14.4 (24.5)
Zach Collins 14.2 (16.3)
Meyers Leonard 13.8 (15.1)
Seth Curry 11.5 (14.9)
Damian Lillard 11.1 (29.7)
Maurice Harkless 10.7 (13.1)
Enes Kanter 10.3 (30.7)
Jake Layman 9.1 (16.1)
Al-Farouq Aminu 8.9 (13.0)
CJ McCollum 7.5 (25.8)
Rodney Hood 2.4 (13.5)


here's where someone could argue that Turner has the ball in his hands more than most of those players, so of course his turnover rate would be higher. He certainly doesn't have the ball in his hands more than Dame and CJ, and maybe not as much as Nurkic, but he has a much higher turnover rate.

if you're wondering what the 2nd numbers for each player are, those are usage rates. Notice that there is only one player of the 12 who has a turnover rate higher than their usage rate. That seems significant but maybe it's just another Turner anomaly. Again, maybe somehow you can argue mitigation for those pairs of numbers, but in light of every other stat, that argument seems kind of strained
 
wizenheimer said:
if you want to argue that turnover rate is misleading, somehow, go ahead. But keep in mind the turnover rates for the entire team:

Evan Turner 18.2 (16.4)
Jusuf Nurkic 14.4 (24.5)
Zach Collins 14.2 (16.3)
Meyers Leonard 13.8 (15.1)
Seth Curry 11.5 (14.9)
Damian Lillard 11.1 (29.7)
Maurice Harkless 10.7 (13.1)
Enes Kanter 10.3 (30.7)
Jake Layman 9.1 (16.1)
Al-Farouq Aminu 8.9 (13.0)
CJ McCollum 7.5 (25.8)
Rodney Hood 2.4 (13.5)


here's where someone could argue that Turner has the ball in his hands more than most of those players, so of course his turnover rate would be higher. He certainly doesn't have the ball in his hands more than Dame and CJ, and maybe not as much as Nurkic, but he has a much higher turnover rate.

if you're wondering what the 2nd numbers for each player are, those are usage rates. Notice that there is only one player of the 12 who has a turnover rate higher than their usage rate. Again, maybe somehow you can argue mitigation for those pairs of numbers, but in light of every other stat, that argument seems strained
Click to expand...

I am arguing that your usage of ast% / tov% is misleading because the populations these are percentages of are different. Simple as that. It's math, not an opinion - do not read into it more than what I said, you used the wrong numbers and gave us a misleading value, I wanted to fix it before it became a talking point that we all accept as gospel, because of a math mistake.

If you are going to use a ratio of assists to turn-overs, use the correct one, and by that one (provided by ESPN) - ET is actually a very effective distributor when you consider how many assists he gets.

I would argue that ET has a lot of problems and he is certainly not worth his contract, but the simple assist to tov ratio metric is one that he actually is not a real problem.

if you're wondering what the 2nd numbers for each player are, those are usage rates. Notice that there is only one player of the 12 who has a turnover rate higher than their usage rate. That seems significant but maybe it's just another Turner anomaly. Again, maybe somehow you can argue mitigation for those pairs of numbers, but in light of every other stat, that argument seems kind of strained
Click to expand...

I am going to argue that once again you are mismatching numbers here to fit an analysis and not the other way around, usage-percent is the ratio of possessions a player is used when he is on the floor - but I am sure that you will agree that someone that has the ball in his hands a lot of time and initiates the offense is different from someone that grabs a defensive rebound and gives it to the person running the offense with small amount of pressure on him - yet they both count as participants in the same possession.

ET does a lot of things poorly that we do not need to look at correlations in places they do not exist to slander him. I would argue that this correlation between usg% and tov% and the specific case of them intersecting in ET's case as significant is tainted at best...
 
Last edited:
CupWizier said:
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.
Click to expand...
Edited by a moderator again?!?!

Damn. You must have a hard time not insulting people. Sad.

And this post serves as the reply to yours. Substitute PPG for "passing efficiency".
BonesJones said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
@CupWizier @BonesJones enough...stop responding to each other if you can't have a decent conversation
 
Chris Craig said:
@CupWizier @BonesJones enough...stop responding to each other if you can't have a decent conversation
Click to expand...

I had my post deleted too. Im cool with it and get it but innitiators should be dealt with more matter of factly than those annoyed and lash back.
Not sure how to though, i fully admit.
But this guy is really ruining any ability to have decent conversations here.

It isnt that hard to not insult. Im not sure why he insists on doing it so much and acting as though he is innocent.
I try to mive on and start up a decent convo elsewhere and every time it seems to end with him calling someone stupid, childish or both, in round about ways.

Telling bones to stop mooching off his mom was just pathetic, served zero productive purpose and he deserves to get backlash for it.

He completely killed a conversation the other day between us and body. Same thing. Didnt go the way he wanted and he resorts to insulting. When you call him out on it he acts innocent.

It is extremely tiresome for some people.

Ill leave it at that and move on. Maybe have a better conversation with him tomorrow.
 
Orion Bailey said:
I had my post deleted too. Im cool with it and get it but innitiators should be dealt with more matter of factly than those annoyed and lash back.
Not sure how to though, i fully admit.
But this guy is really ruining any ability to have decent conversations here.

It isnt that hard to not insult. Im not sure why he insists on doing it so much and acting as though he is innocent.
I try to mive on and start up a decent convo elsewhere and every time it seems to end with him calling someone stupid, childish or both, in round about ways.

Telling bones to stop mooching off his mom was just pathetic, served zero productive purpose and he deserves to get backlash for it.

He completely killed a conversation the other day between us and body. Same thing. Didnt go the way he wanted and he resorts to insulting. When you call him out on it he acts innocent.

It is extremely tiresome for some people.

Ill leave it at that and move on. Maybe have a better conversation with him tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I hear what your saying.

Bones jumped into the conversation and instigated Cup, so should he be dealt with more matter of factly too?

Cup is very technical and it annoys the hell out of people, but it isn't against the rules

He did use insults, but only after propagandist insulted him 1st, not that it makes it ok

I think the whole episode in this thread about opinions/facts has been childish.

I didn't see that conversation. But, I am going to pay attention to things a bit more closely.

But, if you feel this way about his posts responding to his posts only fuels more.

Anyways, thanks for your input. It's being discussed.
 
BonesJones said:
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.
Click to expand...

So were some of yours. You instigated him, went after him in hopes of triggering him, and when you succeed, you complain?
 
Lanny said:
You have to wear pants to post in here? Why didn't somebody tell me sooner? OMG, I'm so embarrassed.
Click to expand...

And, you aren't supposed to sit on the toilet while you post
 
Lanny said:
I'm basing this on old times and old time toilet practice. These days I'm too busy with my Playboys and OUIs and Hustlers.
Click to expand...

Sticky
 
Chris Craig said:
So were some of yours. You instigated him, went after him in hopes of triggering him, and when you succeed, you complain?
Click to expand...
Where did I insult him? I didnt. Nothing I did was against the rules.
 
hoopsjock said:
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.
Click to expand...
Well come on, I'd trust myself, you and like 90% of the posters on this site to pull up from 15+ feet and hit a shot more regularly then ET... :)
 
When are you guys going to start handing out STRIKES like you promised. Threats that aren’t followed through with create chaos. Let’s do this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ABM
Trail Blazers Fan Fest to Be Held at Veterans Memorial Coliseum
Replies
5
Views
309
EL PRESIDENTE
EL PRESIDENTE
Denny Crane
Funny Blazers news: Evan Turner trolls Nick Young on Twitter
Replies
1
Views
706
Paine Tablet
Paine Tablet
OSUBlazerfan
Evan Turner becomes a Blazer
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
89K
hoopsjock
hoopsjock
ABM
Blazers Look to Add Depth at Center
Replies
1
Views
231
BBert
BBert
MIXUM
Some good news and bad news
Replies
9
Views
626
hasoos
hasoos

Users who are viewing this thread

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