Stotts isn't completely intractable, but he sure does adapt slowly. Like turning an aircraft carrier. Going forward, I think I'm going to refer to him as "The USS Terry".
What's wrong with a differing opinion? That's what I find so hilarious is how some of you seem to think your opinions are the only ones that matter and get bent out of shape with differing opinions.
But are not the questions themselves based on a set of assumptions and a particular, unique view of reality?
As shown above - the values are not linked for the same population based on bbref's definition - so it is a pretty misleading number (as shown by the simple ast/to ratio from ESPN). I spend a lot of my time in recent months working on a complex BI project - and I have been reminded almost daily that understanding the basis of how the numbers are calculated is important, unfortunately, in this example - your answer was misleading because the populations are different.
if you want to argue that turnover rate is misleading, somehow, go ahead. But keep in mind the turnover rates for the entire team: Evan Turner 18.2 (16.4) Jusuf Nurkic 14.4 (24.5) Zach Collins 14.2 (16.3) Meyers Leonard 13.8 (15.1) Seth Curry 11.5 (14.9) Damian Lillard 11.1 (29.7) Maurice Harkless 10.7 (13.1) Enes Kanter 10.3 (30.7) Jake Layman 9.1 (16.1) Al-Farouq Aminu 8.9 (13.0) CJ McCollum 7.5 (25.8) Rodney Hood 2.4 (13.5) here's where someone could argue that Turner has the ball in his hands more than most of those players, so of course his turnover rate would be higher. He certainly doesn't have the ball in his hands more than Dame and CJ, and maybe not as much as Nurkic, but he has a much higher turnover rate. if you're wondering what the 2nd numbers for each player are, those are usage rates. Notice that there is only one player of the 12 who has a turnover rate higher than their usage rate. That seems significant but maybe it's just another Turner anomaly. Again, maybe somehow you can argue mitigation for those pairs of numbers, but in light of every other stat, that argument seems kind of strained
I am arguing that your usage of ast% / tov% is misleading because the populations these are percentages of are different. Simple as that. It's math, not an opinion - do not read into it more than what I said, you used the wrong numbers and gave us a misleading value, I wanted to fix it before it became a talking point that we all accept as gospel, because of a math mistake. If you are going to use a ratio of assists to turn-overs, use the correct one, and by that one (provided by ESPN) - ET is actually a very effective distributor when you consider how many assists he gets. I would argue that ET has a lot of problems and he is certainly not worth his contract, but the simple assist to tov ratio metric is one that he actually is not a real problem. I am going to argue that once again you are mismatching numbers here to fit an analysis and not the other way around, usage-percent is the ratio of possessions a player is used when he is on the floor - but I am sure that you will agree that someone that has the ball in his hands a lot of time and initiates the offense is different from someone that grabs a defensive rebound and gives it to the person running the offense with small amount of pressure on him - yet they both count as participants in the same possession. ET does a lot of things poorly that we do not need to look at correlations in places they do not exist to slander him. I would argue that this correlation between usg% and tov% and the specific case of them intersecting in ET's case as significant is tainted at best...
Edited by a moderator again?!?! Damn. You must have a hard time not insulting people. Sad. And this post serves as the reply to yours. Substitute PPG for "passing efficiency".
@CupWizier @BonesJones enough...stop responding to each other if you can't have a decent conversation
I had my post deleted too. Im cool with it and get it but innitiators should be dealt with more matter of factly than those annoyed and lash back. Not sure how to though, i fully admit. But this guy is really ruining any ability to have decent conversations here. It isnt that hard to not insult. Im not sure why he insists on doing it so much and acting as though he is innocent. I try to mive on and start up a decent convo elsewhere and every time it seems to end with him calling someone stupid, childish or both, in round about ways. Telling bones to stop mooching off his mom was just pathetic, served zero productive purpose and he deserves to get backlash for it. He completely killed a conversation the other day between us and body. Same thing. Didnt go the way he wanted and he resorts to insulting. When you call him out on it he acts innocent. It is extremely tiresome for some people. Ill leave it at that and move on. Maybe have a better conversation with him tomorrow.
I hear what your saying. Bones jumped into the conversation and instigated Cup, so should he be dealt with more matter of factly too? Cup is very technical and it annoys the hell out of people, but it isn't against the rules He did use insults, but only after propagandist insulted him 1st, not that it makes it ok I think the whole episode in this thread about opinions/facts has been childish. I didn't see that conversation. But, I am going to pay attention to things a bit more closely. But, if you feel this way about his posts responding to his posts only fuels more. Anyways, thanks for your input. It's being discussed.
