ROY comments on our offense - is there a problem here?

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by Blazinaway, Oct 13, 2010.

  1. andalusian

    andalusian Season - Restarted

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,008
    Likes Received:
    14,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    San Marcos, CA
    Re: Fuck Brandon Roy

    Some? I found the very specific ones that deal with what the thread was talking about - and that's Roy's efficiency and and his ability to get "easy shots". It was specific to the discussion of - does Roy get more easy shots when he handles the ball more or not? The stats shows the Brandon's shot selection seems to be better when he is handling the ball more. Nothing random about it, it was on point.

    I also found very specific stats at the "exact" subject of "easy to shut down offense" by showing the Blazers offensive efficiency.

    These were not "some random stats that agreed with what I am looking at" - it was stats I looked at based on the very specific points discussed in the thread.

    Fine. I believe there is causation based on the observation that Roy is very good at breaking the defense when handling the ball thanks to his superior ability to change direction and speed and the no-hand checking rules. Roy seems to believe it so. There is definitely correlation that leads me to suspect that this is a big part of the cause as well, but if you choose to not think so - so be it. What I do know is that there is nothing but pure speculation on the idea that Brandon will get easier shots by playing mostly off the ball. We have seen nothing from Brandon that will lead me to believe this is the case, he does not have Rip Hamilton or Reggy Miller's nonstop motor of running off screens, he does not enjoy the no-hand-check rules to the same extent when he is not handling the ball - and his ability to get free by changing speeds is much harder to exploit without the ball - because the PG has to be in tune with Roy's deceptive way of changing speeds/directions - which is very hard to do for other players, as clearly shown by the defenders that have a trouble doing it.

    The numbers are very simple, if the Blazers, in a Roy initiated offense took 400 more attempts than the Blazers in a Roy off-the-ball offense - and only 147 of these shots could, possibly be attributed to more offensive rebounds, it shows that the Blazers had at least an extra 253 attempts with the "ISO heavy" offense - which is exactly my point, the Blazers, in an ISO offense initiated by Roy were actually able to get more shot attempts than that same team with Roy off the ball. I specifically mentioned the Offensive rebounds to pre-counter the argument that the Blazers took more attempts that year because Oden/Pryzbilla were around. Don't loose the sight of the forest because of the trees.

    The offensive rebounds issue was not about offensive rebounds, it was a point in "your" favor showing that the argument usually made about the extra possessions was not relevant to the discussion at hand.

    I find it very hard to see how I have confirmation bias when I show you dataset that are very large and are not limited to 6 games in the playoffs. I also very much doubt that there is confirmation bias when I actually went to look at the data after being presented with an argument and specifically providing data that touches on the subjects raised...
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2010
  2. blazerboy30

    blazerboy30 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    423
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Re: Fuck Brandon Roy

    Part of the problem here is that you are arguing with me, but I don't think you even know what my position is.
     
  3. andalusian

    andalusian Season - Restarted

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,008
    Likes Received:
    14,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    San Marcos, CA
    Re: Fuck Brandon Roy

    My only argument with you was the "easy to shut down offense". My other references were to Minstrel in the post you replied to.
     

Share This Page