Fan Fest 2025 Official Thread

More points than shots is kinda still a pretty good measure.

 

This is actually false and that is not a matter of opinion. For a highlights video guy, you don't know a lot about the actual game and team, do you?

 

Again, same response:

This is actually false and that is not a matter of opinion. For a highlights video guy, you don't know a lot about the actual game and team, do you?

 

That's actually the main reason I visit this forum. Compared to most people, I don't know a lot about basketball. But the members of this forum make me look like a basketball genius.

@THE HCP

 

While I have nothing against Ant it’s pretty telling story that no one wanted to trade for him. Boston desperately needed to dump salary and asked us to throw in a 2nd round draft pick. While I love that we have Jrue, he’s on tail end of career with big contract.

As soon as Boston got Ant they were looking to trade him. Again nothing against Ant I really like the kid but he was good at one thing and one thing only, scoring. I think Sharpe can easily replace his scoring and clutch scoring. Believe sharpe was something like top 8 in clutch moments last year.

 

It's just a stat and stats can be misleading but Ant played in 28 of our wins and 42 of our losses last season... that makes our win percentage with Ant 40%.

The team had 36 wins and 46 losses overall for a win percentage of 43.9%.

That means we went 8 and 4 in games without Ant. That's a win percentage without Ant of 66.6%

The games without Ant should be easy to breakdown:

A win against the Wolves on 11/13
A win against the Hawks on 11/17
A loss against the Thunder on 11/20
A win against the Bulls on 1/19 *
A win against the Nuggets 3/21

Ant sat all of April

A win against the Hawks 4/1
A win against the Raptors 4/3
A loss against the Bulls 4/4
A win against the Spurs 4/6
A loss against the Jazz 4/9
A loss against the Warriors 4/11
A win against the Lakers 4/13

I went back and looked at the games without Ant and if Ayton played in them... if Ayton played I put an * on that game because I know you think we'll miss Ayton too and a lot of people on here seem to think both DA and Ant leaving are addition by subtraction.

One of the wins without Ant was a game Ayton played in and none of the losses. That's still 7-4 without Ant or Ayton with a win percentage of 63.6%. The combined win percentage of the teams we played without both guys was 51.6% so obviously a little better than the league average but a balanced sample size. That's just a look at things, it wasn't meant to be an argument one way or the other.

TLDR 40% win percentage with Ant, 66.6% without him.

 

Brilliant. Appreciate your take. It's very true. I just can't stand the jerky, pompous (which is especially ridiculous because the ones acting pompous aren't particularly intelligent and they lack a sense of humor or it's very limited) guys here.

 

That was Michael Jordan‘s rule. And if it’s good enough for MJ, it’s good enough for me

 

This is all hearsay!

 

Get him a mirror ROFL

 

so does this mean I am one of the few that actually CAN act pompous?

 

First, good job for using that word of the day calendar. Proud of you.
Second, Given that the formulas to calculate said stat and the data are publicly available, that's the wrong word to use here, but it's close. Keep working on it, I believe in you.

 

When the stats confirm what the eye can see, then that's a pretty good argument that can hold water. Ant is just simply not a player that is going to be on many winning teams. While above average on offense, he's a huge liability on defense and that leads him to be a negative player over all. There is a reason Boston (to my knowledge) never had a press conference to announce him coming on board and by all rumors were shopping him the minute after they traded for him. I'm sure he's a nice guy, but his skill set is easily replaceable and could very well be addition by subtraction because of his abysmal defense.

 

it's a stupid 'rule'...it's basically meaningless.

all 15 Blazers who played more than 200 minutes last season had more points than shots. And Portland was one of the worst shooting teams in the league. They were 26th in FG%; 26th in 3ptFG%; 24th in 2ptFG%; 26th in FT%; 25th in eFG%; 23rd in TS%....they sucked

The player who came closest to the 1:1 mark was Kris Murray at 1.03

points/shot:

Avdija 1.44
Walker 1.37
Timelord 1.32
Clingan 1.31
Thybulle 1.27
Camara 1.23
Ayton 1.23
Scoot 1.22
Sharpe 1.21
Simons 1.20
Grant 1.18
Reath 1.17
Banton 1.10
Rupert 1.09
Murray 1.03

(for his career, Dame is at 1.364; Avdija 1.298)

I'd guess that over 95% of NBA rotation players had more points than shots. Probably 80-85% of all NBA players did the same. It's a useless standard

 

It’s the first thing I look at when I look at the box score.
After that I look at hustle stats.
The rest to me is pure fantasy stuff.

 

It would be better to acknowledge that a 20 point on 19 shots is much worse than 20 points on 14 shots.
You also are not looking at players that get 6 points on 4 shots.
The way you interpret things matters here.
When talking about the main scoring threat or a scrub in garbage time might make a difference.
Obviously MJ was doubled nearly every night.
Lillard the same.
Those players deal with a total different metric so that kind of shoots your whole premise down.

I mean not one player on the Blazers roster last year was ever doubled or considered a primary threat more than a few times a game.

 

I don't know what you think "my premise" was. And it wasn't my premise; I didn't bring it up, I just expanded on it. The fact that all 15 blazers last season with over 200 minutes had more points than shots sure indicates that that 'more-points-than-shots' is a useless standard. Kris Murray had more points than shots; so did Deni, but they sure weren't equal as scorers

I do think points per shot is a very valid gauge of scoring skills. It isn't the only one, but it's a primary gauge

obviously, like a lot of 'advanced' stats there is context. Volume is part of context. PER is a very good gauge of overall impact, but it needs to be layered. You shouldn't take much from PER when you are comparing a 34 minute/game starter to a 19 minute/game backup. Same for points/shot. And yes, part of the context needs to be the resistance each player faced, and when

 

One dimensional scorers have no value in 2025. It used to be different. Nobody offered anything for Clarkson, CJ, Cam Thomas, Sexton, Poole, etc either.

 

#SuperBAM