Knicks · From Dust You Were Made & To Dust You Shall Return (page 2)

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I beg to differ. It seems all everyone cares about is FG%

What are Shump's complete TS & usuage stats for his career? How much is he contributing by getting to the line, assists, steals, rebounds & team defense?

not the smart folks who know that the world is not flat.

look at Hardens FG percentage and you will see why it is a dumb stat.

Shumperts career TS is 49.5 (Feltontory). Nuff said.

FG% is a great stat

TS% is another useful statistical measure

But you can sight Harden for FG%

and I'll raise you and

Sight Paul George for TS%

And thus each one would cancel each other out

If you tried to determine player impact singularly from those statistical measures

There are others who throw major wrenches into this argument

Tim Duncan
Jason Kidd
Kobe Bryant
Allen Iverson
Paul Pierce
Dwyane Wade
Russell WestBrook

F500ONE wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I beg to differ. It seems all everyone cares about is FG%

What are Shump's complete TS & usuage stats for his career? How much is he contributing by getting to the line, assists, steals, rebounds & team defense?

not the smart folks who know that the world is not flat.

look at Hardens FG percentage and you will see why it is a dumb stat.

Shumperts career TS is 49.5 (Feltontory). Nuff said.

FG% is a great stat

TS% is another useful statistical measure

But you can sight Harden for FG%

and I'll raise you and

Sight Paul George for TS%

And thus each one would cancel each other out

If you tried to determine player impact singularly from those statistical measures

There are others who throw major wrenches into this argument

Tim Duncan
Jason Kidd
Kobe Bryant
Allen Iverson
Paul Pierce
Dwyane Wade
Russell WestBrook

How do these players throw a wrench into "this" argument?

FG% is a partial. Why use a partial? Just to be stubborn?

Look at everything you can get your hands on.

WS
WS48
WP
TS
Numbers Per 100 possessions
RPM
USG -> AST
Etc ...

I will judge players from now on their FT% - Its a great stat

mreinman wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I beg to differ. It seems all everyone cares about is FG%

What are Shump's complete TS & usuage stats for his career? How much is he contributing by getting to the line, assists, steals, rebounds & team defense?

not the smart folks who know that the world is not flat.

look at Hardens FG percentage and you will see why it is a dumb stat.

Shumperts career TS is 49.5 (Feltontory). Nuff said.

FG% is a great stat

TS% is another useful statistical measure

But you can sight Harden for FG%

and I'll raise you and

Sight Paul George for TS%

And thus each one would cancel each other out

If you tried to determine player impact singularly from those statistical measures

There are others who throw major wrenches into this argument

Tim Duncan
Jason Kidd
Kobe Bryant
Allen Iverson
Paul Pierce
Dwyane Wade
Russell WestBrook

How do these players throw a wrench into "this" argument?

FG% is a partial. Why use a partial? Just to be stubborn?

Look at everything you can get your hands on.

WS
WS48
WP
TS
Numbers Per 100 possessions
RPM
USG -> AST
Etc ...

I will judge players from now on their FT% - Its a great stat

Okay I'll give that only if this reflected in your posts

Those other statistical measures you sight in this last reply

Are near tumbleweeds in discussions when you marry your eye test with the player

The only 2 I consistently see you refer to are TS% and EFG%

But yeah I'd love to see more Win Share discussion, PER, PPS, +/-,

FG% from all different places and angles on the court///// as you said etc etc

Bring it you Bad Mama Jama

Tim Duncan - pretty efficient for a big who can't shoot 3's. Would be better if he could at least hit FT's (compare him to Anthony Davis or Karl Malone (or even Amare) for efficiency comparison at the PF position)

Jason Kidd - If he could shoot he would probably have been the best player of all time but he was not a good shooter

Kobe Bryant - Medium Efficient - chucking hurt his career

Allen Iverson - Not sure why you bring him up. He was awful (though medium in denver)

Paul Pierce - low FG / high TS because of his 3's and FT's (like Harden, the perfect example)

Dwyane Wade - Very Efficient though a bad 3 point shooter and not great FT% (shows how great he was to overcome those)

Russell WestBrook - what about him? Not sure how he got in here

Some of these other guys were/are great because of everything else that they brought to the table (even if they were not super efficient)

mreinman wrote:James Harden - Super Efficient (though low FG% - how does FG% let us know that he gets to the FT line a zillion times A game and he shoots FT's efficiently?)
Paul George - Medium Efficient, Good Rebounder, Very Good Defender

Tim Duncan - pretty efficient for a big who can't shoot 3's. Would be better if he could at least hit FT's (compare him to Anthony Davis or Karl Malone (or even Amare) for efficiency comparison at the PF position)

Jason Kidd - If he could shoot he would probably have been the best player of all time but he was not a good shooter

Kobe Bryant - Medium Efficient - chucking hurt his career

Allen Iverson - Not sure why you bring him up. He was awful (though medium in denver)

Paul Pierce - low FG / high TS because of his 3's and FT's (like Harden, the perfect example)

Dwyane Wade - Very Efficient though a bad 3 point shooter and not great FT% (shows how great he was to overcome those)

Russell WestBrook - what about him? Not sure how he got in here

Some of these other guys were/are great because of everything else that they brought to the table (even if they were not super efficient)

This is my point, although preference would be

Perform as efficient as possible

The first thing I'm not going to declare

Is hey this guys needs to get his TS%

Or I can't take this guy seriously unless he improves his TS

How about do many things as well as possible even if you happen to not be a leader in efficiency

Iverson although not efficient had hella game impact

And performed great in the playoffs in clutch moments especially winning time

He also played hard at all times adequate ball distributor and solid defense

But yes he was a chucker no doubt

I'm focusing more on game impact from a player

Hence Kevin Love is a decent TS% guy but has almost zero game impact

Kind of like Melo as had been my argument that TS% doesn''t always tell you the whole truth

F500ONE wrote:

mreinman wrote:James Harden - Super Efficient (though low FG% - how does FG% let us know that he gets to the FT line a zillion times A game and he shoots FT's efficiently?)
Paul George - Medium Efficient, Good Rebounder, Very Good Defender

Tim Duncan - pretty efficient for a big who can't shoot 3's. Would be better if he could at least hit FT's (compare him to Anthony Davis or Karl Malone (or even Amare) for efficiency comparison at the PF position)

Jason Kidd - If he could shoot he would probably have been the best player of all time but he was not a good shooter

Kobe Bryant - Medium Efficient - chucking hurt his career

Allen Iverson - Not sure why you bring him up. He was awful (though medium in denver)

Paul Pierce - low FG / high TS because of his 3's and FT's (like Harden, the perfect example)

Dwyane Wade - Very Efficient though a bad 3 point shooter and not great FT% (shows how great he was to overcome those)

Russell WestBrook - what about him? Not sure how he got in here

Some of these other guys were/are great because of everything else that they brought to the table (even if they were not super efficient)

This is my point, although preference would be

Perform as efficient as possible

The first thing I'm not going to declare

Is hey this guys needs to get his TS%

Or I can't take this guy seriously unless he improves his TS

How about do many things as well as possible even if you happen to not be a leader in efficiency

Iverson although not efficient had hella game impact

And performed great in the playoffs in clutch moments especially winning time

He also played hard at all times adequate ball distributor and solid defense

But yes he was a chucker no doubt

I'm focusing more on game impact from a player

Hence Kevin Love is a decent TS% guy but has almost zero game impact

Kind of like Melo as had been my argument that TS% doesn''t always tell you the whole truth

Wow ... now you are really sounding more and more like TKF.

Iverson was a chucker that took away good shots from fellow teammates. He was also a terrible defender. Only recently have people realized how bad he was.

Kevin Love has zero game impact? And you are saying this because of??

Melo is a medium TS guy who should be a super high TS guy. He also plays no defense. He got maxed out because he can maintain efficiency while still being a high volume shooter / chucker.

You are really not making any viable arguments. So are you now an all Eye Test kinda guy?

http://www.thescore.com/nba/news/350333

yellowboy90 wrote:Calling Iverson a solid defender is like saying Harden is a solid defender. Just because you get a lot of steals that does not mean you are a good defender.

exactly!

Iverson gambled all the time and left his teammates in bad positions. He was a terrible defender.

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

yeah ... beating milwaukee 4-3 ... super

and they were a slow pace lock down defensive team

Guns, do you ever look at the bigger picture or do you just shoot from the hip?

Iverson did have his moments and he was the best horrible shot taker / creator of all time. His overall career though was putrid chucking and selfish bull sh1t.

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

That roster Iverson had was awful to the fullest

Maybe the worst roster in all of basketball to get to a Finals

Sans Lebron's Cavs roster

Funny mreiman boxed himself into a corner again with TS% as I brought up players

Who counter the argument both ways in favor of FG% vs TS%

Yet if you look at the Milwaukee's Big 3

They had Ray Allen-Glenn Robinson-Sam Cassell

All had better TS% than Iverson and were beast at times

In their own right but they couldn't contain A.I.

But if he wants to dumb down A.I. getting to the Finals

Why does Melo struggle so mightily getting the Knicks to the playoffs

In a supposed Weak East, who has a higher career TS% than Iverson

I mean no one is asking Melo to take this motley crue to the Finals

But why is the struggle so real consistently under .500

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Calling Iverson a solid defender is like saying Harden is a solid defender. Just because you get a lot of steals that does not mean you are a good defender.

exactly!

Iverson gambled all the time and left his teammates in bad positions. He was a terrible defender.

Solid simply means held his own but touche

In injecting lofty terms on guys who shoot %37 from 3

F500ONE wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

That roster Iverson had was awful to the fullest

Maybe the worst roster in all of basketball to get to a Finals

Sans Lebron's Cavs roster

Funny mreiman boxed himself into a corner again with TS% as I brought up players

Who counter the argument both ways in favor of FG% vs TS%

Yet if you look at the Milwaukee's Big 3

They had Ray Allen-Glenn Robinson-Sam Cassell

All had better TS% than Iverson and were beast at times

In their own right but they couldn't contain A.I.

But if he wants to dumb down A.I. getting to the Finals

Why does Melo struggle so mightily getting the Knicks to the playoffs

In a supposed Weak East, who has a higher career TS% than Iverson

I mean no one is asking Melo to take this motley crue to the Finals

But why is the struggle so real consistently under .500

your just saying a lot of stuff that equates to a lotta nuttin.

lets take one player. And show me an argument where FG should be looked out before TS.

Better yet, please show me one (reputable) article that states that FG should be preferred over TS.

you contradict yourself all over the place ... you hate Kobe and Melo yet you love Iverson? Where the hell is your consistency?

Iverson was good defender and kobe was not etc .... sheeesh

Lots of circular logic which is making me think of .... wait a minute

F500ONE wrote:

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Calling Iverson a solid defender is like saying Harden is a solid defender. Just because you get a lot of steals that does not mean you are a good defender.

exactly!

Iverson gambled all the time and left his teammates in bad positions. He was a terrible defender.

Solid simply means held his own but touche

In injecting lofty terms on guys who shoot %37 from 3

your gonna need to dumb it done just a bit more for me to really start buying that you are tkf

but ... you are getting there quickly

F500ONE wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

That roster Iverson had was awful to the fullest

Maybe the worst roster in all of basketball to get to a Finals

Sans Lebron's Cavs roster

Funny mreiman boxed himself into a corner again with TS% as I brought up players

Who counter the argument both ways in favor of FG% vs TS%

Yet if you look at the Milwaukee's Big 3

They had Ray Allen-Glenn Robinson-Sam Cassell

All had better TS% than Iverson and were beast at times

In their own right but they couldn't contain A.I.

But if he wants to dumb down A.I. getting to the Finals

Why does Melo struggle so mightily getting the Knicks to the playoffs

In a supposed Weak East, who has a higher career TS% than Iverson

I mean no one is asking Melo to take this motley crue to the Finals

But why is the struggle so real consistently under .500

iverson was an unrepentant chucker but he still managed to somehow to pass the ball and create some semblance of cohesion. look at his usage (astronomical) and his assist rate. it is around 1.1:1.00 for his career which is what you expect from a tiny, undersized shooting guard. wade has a similar ratio for his career.

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

That roster Iverson had was awful to the fullest

Maybe the worst roster in all of basketball to get to a Finals

Sans Lebron's Cavs roster

Funny mreiman boxed himself into a corner again with TS% as I brought up players

Who counter the argument both ways in favor of FG% vs TS%

Yet if you look at the Milwaukee's Big 3

They had Ray Allen-Glenn Robinson-Sam Cassell

All had better TS% than Iverson and were beast at times

In their own right but they couldn't contain A.I.

But if he wants to dumb down A.I. getting to the Finals

Why does Melo struggle so mightily getting the Knicks to the playoffs

In a supposed Weak East, who has a higher career TS% than Iverson

I mean no one is asking Melo to take this motley crue to the Finals

But why is the struggle so real consistently under .500

iverson was an unrepentant chucker but he still managed to somehow to pass the ball and create some semblance of cohesion. look at his usage (astronomical) and his assist rate. it is around 1.1:1.00 for his career which is what you expect from a tiny, undersized shooting guard. wade has a similar ratio for his career.

He was a decent passer. Wade was slightly better.

in comparison, wade was very efficient and Iverson was horribly inefficient.

Therefore, Iverson needed to pass up (and pass) far more shots than Wade.

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

That roster Iverson had was awful to the fullest

Maybe the worst roster in all of basketball to get to a Finals

Sans Lebron's Cavs roster

Funny mreiman boxed himself into a corner again with TS% as I brought up players

Who counter the argument both ways in favor of FG% vs TS%

Yet if you look at the Milwaukee's Big 3

They had Ray Allen-Glenn Robinson-Sam Cassell

All had better TS% than Iverson and were beast at times

In their own right but they couldn't contain A.I.

But if he wants to dumb down A.I. getting to the Finals

Why does Melo struggle so mightily getting the Knicks to the playoffs

In a supposed Weak East, who has a higher career TS% than Iverson

I mean no one is asking Melo to take this motley crue to the Finals

But why is the struggle so real consistently under .500

iverson was an unrepentant chucker but he still managed to somehow to pass the ball and create some semblance of cohesion. look at his usage (astronomical) and his assist rate. it is around 1.1:1.00 for his career which is what you expect from a tiny, undersized shooting guard. wade has a similar ratio for his career.

He was a decent passer. Wade was slightly better.

in comparison, wade was very efficient and Iverson was horribly inefficient.

Therefore, Iverson needed to pass up (and pass) far more shots than Wade.

Well you are not accounting for Iverson being Tiny. Clearly that means something.

yellowboy90 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Iverson got them to the finals! They were doing something right

That roster Iverson had was awful to the fullest

Maybe the worst roster in all of basketball to get to a Finals

Sans Lebron's Cavs roster

Funny mreiman boxed himself into a corner again with TS% as I brought up players

Who counter the argument both ways in favor of FG% vs TS%

Yet if you look at the Milwaukee's Big 3

They had Ray Allen-Glenn Robinson-Sam Cassell

All had better TS% than Iverson and were beast at times

In their own right but they couldn't contain A.I.

But if he wants to dumb down A.I. getting to the Finals

Why does Melo struggle so mightily getting the Knicks to the playoffs

In a supposed Weak East, who has a higher career TS% than Iverson

I mean no one is asking Melo to take this motley crue to the Finals

But why is the struggle so real consistently under .500

iverson was an unrepentant chucker but he still managed to somehow to pass the ball and create some semblance of cohesion. look at his usage (astronomical) and his assist rate. it is around 1.1:1.00 for his career which is what you expect from a tiny, undersized shooting guard. wade has a similar ratio for his career.

He was a decent passer. Wade was slightly better.

in comparison, wade was very efficient and Iverson was horribly inefficient.

Therefore, Iverson needed to pass up (and pass) far more shots than Wade.

Well you are not accounting for Iverson being Tiny. Clearly that means something.

yes. He was the most exciting horrible shot taker and athletic little selfish idiot of all time.

Nate is Tiny and he can dunk

Mugzy was tiny and used his brains and did the best he could with it.

Iverson could have been sensational if he wasn't so selfish.

You should be honored.

GP	GS	MIN	FGM-A	 FG%	3PM-A	 3P%	FTM-A	 FT%	OR	DR	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
17	17	27.5	4.2-9.9	.429	1.2-3.1	.377	1.2-1.8	.700	0.9	2.7	3.6	3.2	0.2	1.2	3.2	1.8	10.9