AbeVigodaLive wrote:I feel like the +/- statistic has been largely debunked... or at least taken with a grain of salt by most posters... but it's being kept alive as something more meaningful by one single poster at this point.
To be fair (see what I did there ;-) ?)...most (all?) of us who think outscoring the opponent can actually be a good thing if you like winning basketball games also agree that +/- in a 1-game sample size typically doesn't mean much. I haven't seen anyone here who doesn't regularly add that grain of salt. But it's hard to ignore when a certain player consistently over years of play outscores his opponent, and just as hard to ignore when the opposite occurs.
I love trends, and especially when a player does something that shows he might be changing. DeMar DeRozan is a great example. After 12 seasons of great scoring stats but very poor on/off stats and expected wins stats, he has completely turned around in the last two years. I find that notable and interesting, but it's fine if some find it irrelevant.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:I feel like the +/- statistic has been largely debunked... or at least taken with a grain of salt by most posters... but it's being kept alive as something more meaningful by one single poster at this point.
To be fair (see what I did there ;-) ?)...most (all?) of us who think outscoring the opponent can actually be a good thing if you like winning basketball games also agree that +/- in a 1-game sample size typically doesn't mean much. I haven't seen anyone here who doesn't regularly add that grain of salt. But it's hard to ignore when a certain player consistently over years of play outscores his opponent, and just as hard to ignore when the opposite occurs.
I love trends, and especially when a player does something that shows he might be changing. DeMar DeRozan is a great example. After 12 seasons of great scoring stats but very poor on/off stats and expected wins stats, he has completely turned around in the last two years. I find that notable and interesting, but it's fine if some find it irrelevant.
Context, including roles on the team, lineup combinations, et al.
Unless you actually think that DeRozan was making 55+ win teams worse in Toronto and his multiple coaches were really really dumb giving him the most minutes on the team.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:I'm confused, we always seem to get a Conley vs Russell synopsis on nights they both play. But strangely tonight, nothing. Hmmmm, strange indeed.
Ha, strange indeed. I will add though that DLo has been very good in LA so far. It's Beasley and Vando who are playing poorly (and I love Vando). DLo shot poorly last night while Conley shot great, but Russell had a very good true PG night with 11 assists and NO turnovers...I'm not going to take the time to look it up, but I;m pretty sure we never got a stat line like that the entire time he was with us. He once again led the Lakers starters with a + 4, while Vando and Beasley were a -14 and -8 respectively. Russell leads the Lakers in on/off for the season, while he was dead last with the Wolves this season. You can't make it up...I think that defines what it means to be a long-suffering Wolves fan!
Well FNG - I guess it's up to me to do Cam's dirty work. We actually did get a number of stat lines like that - actually better ones overall - when he was with us. Here are some examples from this season:
30p/12a/2to on 11/14 v Cavs
12p/10a/2to/7r on 12/24 v. Celtics
15p/10a/2to/5r on 12/1 v.Memphis
23p/8a/2to on 1/22 v. Rocket
OK, he had 2 turnovers in each of those game, but let's not quibble. DLO had four zero turnover games for the Wolves this season.
Here are some examples of comparable excellent DLO PG stats from last season:
15o/8a/0to on 11/13 v. Clippers
21p/11a/1to on 11/30 v. Pacers
22p/10a/1to on 1/10 v. Rockets
The list goes on with at least five more games last season in which DLO had double-digit assists, double-digit points and no more than 2 turnovers.
I obviously have too much time on my hands. Of course, my point isn't that DLO is great and should not have been traded. He had lots of 3+ turnover/single digit assist games with the Wolves just as he has so far in the majority of games he's played for the Lakes. DLO is and will remain the same player he's always been. Okogie had a weird run of hot scoring, but not surprisingly he's back to his old self as a high-energy disruptive defender who can't shoot. There is no Wolves curse; just bad Wolves management.
I was talking about last night, not making an overarching argument.
Man that was a tough game but a mostly fun one to watch. It was a disappointing loss not because the Wolves didn't play well for the most part but it was because despite everything they could have won this one without Edwards but they also had a couple poor plays that lost them the game.
I hope Edwards is ok and I want him to come back but I do want them to be careful with the guy.
monsterpile wrote:Man that was a tough game but a mostly fun one to watch. It was a disappointing loss not because the Wolves didn't play well for the most part but it was because despite everything they could have won this one without Edwards but they also had a couple poor plays that lost them the game.
I hope Edwards is ok and I want him to come back but I do want them to be careful with the guy.
Agree, Monster. They showed some grit after Edwards went down. Tough loss followed by a fairly lopsided loss to the Raptors. My mind is already firmly planted in the off-season. I just don't believe this season is salvageable.
