Last season Sergio averaged 4.7 turnovers per 48 minutes. Steve Nash had 4.8.
Correct. But, Nash's TOV% of 20.8% is still lower than Sergio's 24.7% - likewise his AST% of 42.4% is a lot higher than Sergio's 35.7% - add the fact that Nash is a much better scorer with a TS% of .615 vs. Sergio's .491 - and I am really not sure why this matters.
You can say that the Suns had more possessions per game than the Blazers, but it still shows that getting a lot of turnovers doesn't disqualify you from being a great guard, if you get the assists to offset that.
Well, the numbers clearly show that Sergio turns over more of the possessions and does not assist anywhere near as well as Nash does - and on top of that - Nash does it while scoring very very well while Sergio is a bad scorer - so...
That's why I talked about the A/TO ratio
A/TO ratio means very little without possessions and overall offensive efficiency - Sergio's offensive efficiency is 109 points per 100 possessions - The Blazers as a whole have offensive efficiency of 114 points per 100 possessions - in other words, the Blazer's offense was worse when Sergio played.
In comparison - Nash had an offensive efficiency of 119 points per 100 possessions where the Suns as a team had 113.6 points per 100 possessions. In other words - the Suns were better when Nash was on the floor.
and you want to talk only about the TO/possession ratio.
Well, I thought that was bad enough to show you how ineffective Sergio was for us last year. Since it did not go through your head - I expended the discussion to show you how much worse the team was when Sergio was on the floor.
You gave no link, so I had to look your stat up.
What is there to give? There are 2 public detailed statistics for NBA players - basketball-reference.com and 82games.com - this one clearly came from bbr - here you go:
Steve Nash -
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nashst01.html
Sergio -
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/rodrise01.html
The team stats are from there as well - but I suspect you can navigate the site by yourself.
I see the other players on the list all have far more than Sergio's 15 minutes a game (see link below).
Of course they do - they are better players and the coaches are not dumb.
He's in a system not geared toward his passes, while the others on the list start, so their teammates look for their passes, or else get benched for turnovers when they don't catch passes. That's the plight of the substitute. If he were a starter, his TO per minute or per possession would decrease. Check out how Sergio is matched up against starters on the list. He's at 4.7, which is bad, but I just gave the reasons for 1) the cause and 2) TO/possessions or per minute is less important than A/TO, at which he's good.
Ugh. Again with the star treatment for Sergio the "unappreciated". If you are a good player - you will be a starter or at least get the minutes. It is as simple as that. NBA coaches are hired and retained on results. They have no agenda to keep a good player away - it just goes against logic. Sergio is not a good player - and have never been - thus he got little minutes.
The Blazers were better when Sergio was not playing, thus his play time was low and he was traded.
If you still do not believe me - look at another source -
http://www.82games.com/0809/0809POR.HTM
Of all our "regular rotation" guys - Sergio's net +/- is the worst on the team. Specifically if you look at his stats
http://www.82games.com/0809/08POR2.HTM - his win% of 38.1% is criminal for a team that won as much as the Blazers did last year - and if you look at the net PER against the people he was playing against (backup point guards) - you will see that he still lost 1.1 PER to his opponent backup PG (per 48) and 17.1 PER (per 48) when playing SG.
In other words - even as a backup PG going against backup PGs - he was worse than the opposition. Where the hell is the justification to make him a starter when he is worse than the other team's backups?
