I went over the 82games.com data, and looked at win% for our individual players. Blake leads the team with an eye popping 92.3% I am not kidding you. This is an amazing stat. Our 2nd best player (Roy) is at 69.1% http://www.82games.com/0910/09POR1.HTM
In discussions pertaining to BLANKY, the actual stats don't matter; only negative opinions matter. Incredible information, though. Damn near a bombshell.
Honestly, I do not understand this result for Blake. I thought, and still do - that people were riding him too much - but there is something that Blake does that works, and apparently, Nate noticed it and continues to ride it. What it is, I do not know.
I know people hate +/-, but for the season so far, BLANKY is leading the team with Roy right behind him. My thought on the criticisms of him is that people don't understand how rare it is to find a player who knows their role and plays it effectively.
If the guy can play 61% of available minutes and win at 92.3% I do not care where he plays. If we win 92.3% of the games when he plays Center - you put him at Center. This Stat is just whacked. It is so unexpected, that I do not know what to say about it. For some reason, Blake on the court made us a better team than the one we played against in 12 out of 13 games this year. I am shocked.
The Blake hate doesn't surprise me. Afterall, Travis isn't around any more and people have to hate someone. It's their life-force. There have been stretches the last two games where I was totally disgusted at his play, but that can be said for a lot of other guys as well in the fourth quarter last night, and at least Blake ultimately redeemed himself. He's a role player and he does good things, but like so many role players gone before, fans expect him to be Brandon Roy. Sorry folks, we only have one of those.
You must have missed the experts telling Roy he needs to stop being selfish and adjust his game around Andre Miller.
That is where I am at. I'm not saying Blake can do no wrong, the Blazers will only win a championship with him playing or anything like that. But when other players have bad games, I don't see the reactions I see with Blake. Blake is nothing more than a role player, but IMO he is a good role player.
Remember how everyone was enamored with Shane Battier, calling him a glue-guy whose contribution is not really shown in "standard" statistics? Maybe, just maybe, Blake is our glue guy? Going a little bit off-topic and discussing +/- vs. Win% - +/- is stat with a lot of noise. For example, if your team is consistently -3 worse with you on the floor for 10 games, but you run into the New Jersey Nets and blow them by 40 points with you on the floor - you have a positive +/- - but it does not really reflect your contributions or how the team plays with you. Win% is less volatile to these noise conditions. The criticism that both +/- and win% can have thrown at them - is that your stats might be skewed because of who you play with. For example, last year our best win% players were Roy (around 69% if memory serves), LMA (around 65%) and Blake (around 65%). The question you have to ask at this point - is Blake's win% so good because he plays so much with LMA and Roy - is a valid question. But, this year, with Blake's Win% so much better than anyone else on the team - it is pretty clear that we are consistently a better team than our opponent when Blake is on the floor. Why? I don't know - but these are the numbers. Just to illustrate how crazy his stat is - I did look around at some of the rosters of the better teams in the league - trying to find other players that have such a high win% - the only two I found (I ignored bad teams) were Al Horford at 91% and D-12 at 81% Honestly - this is such an outlier as far as performance, especially when you consider how bad his individual stats are - that it is a very very interesting thing - but it is starting to make sense, to me, why Nate played him so much this year. I do not understand what it is that Blake is doing that makes us play better consistently when he is on the floor - but I can understand why he plays as much as he does based on the results.
Blake had a 65.2% Win% last year. For comparison, Roy was at 69.2%. So far this year, Miller is at 61.5%.
Well... you could really pick stats out of anywhere for any player and use it as evidence that the guy helps your team. These win percentages, defensive win shares, offensive win shares, all this stuff on the internet... I don't know. Going down to look at Blakey's clutch statistics, his win % falls to 57.1 and has a net effect of -18.3 over 48 minutes, and his PER is 9 something. I don't hate Blake and I want him on the team, but he is what he is: a nice role-playing PG who can hit the 3 ball and play well off Roy.
I'm not really sure how win % works, so answer this for me please. If Lebron James was on a team with 4 of us, and we played a team consisting of my 7 year old son and the top 4 players in the league other than James, and they beat us, would his win % be 0, and my son's be 100?
Not really, considering this incredible statistic that andlusian unearthed. If it's so easy to cherry-pick data to support a player, why hasn't anyone come up with anything to show me that the offense has improve in 2009 over 2008?
A good point in isolation. But the entire team was pretty bad in 4th quarters this year. When you compare his clutch stats to other members of the team - it does not look so bad. His clutch win% is highest among our 3 point-guards (Miller and Roy are at 50%). Out other notable clutch performers: Outlaw - 50% LMA - 43% Rudy - 33% Webster - 25% Joel - 50% The only guy on the team that matches Blake's clutch performance this year is Greg at 57% Again, it's hard to hate on Blake when you see where he ranks in the team, even in clutch performance.
Win% refers to the time a player is on the floor. If when LeBron was on the floor his team won when he was on the floor - his win% would be 100%. This stat talks only about winning when a player is on the floor. If you read my post above - I raised the specific question you wanted to ask - about correlation between this statistic and who you play with. It is a good point and a cause of concern when trying to interpret the data at times - and as I showed, last year, you could question Blake's win% and ask if it is as good as it was because he played so much next to Roy and LMA. But, this year, with his Win% so much better than any player on the squad - this is not a real issue, imho.
Supposing that is true. You're assuming NO substitutions, and ONE game against ONE set of opponents, who ALSO do not substitute. That would mean five players with one number and another 5 with the other number. But if there WERE substitutions, so that LBJ was subbed off the floor and some other schmo subbed on, then the team would get creamed while he was off and his number would be better than everyone else's (and the guy who subbed in for him would have the worst number). Similarly, the best your 7 year old could do would be EQUAL to the good players he plays with, not better. So the fact that Blake is BETTER than anyone else means something.
