Yeah Lowe is on vacation. He's been tweeting pictures of himself over in that Europe land.

So you can package a draft pick but not players with a player if he's being signed and traded right? Like suns can send out bledsoe + pick for something just can't add in another player?

Some phx reporter saying its basically a lock that bledsoe is being traded.

Anything realistic? I cant really come up with anything.

Lowe probably poppin' bottles on his 800k/year salary

I'd like to see the Oreb% vs Drtg graph. I bet there's a correlation there.

What is the term for what that article is doing?

It's taking two non-causal relationships and trying to relate them through a casual 3rd party relationship they both share. Which is insufficient analysis.

no ghan lie and pretend i read anything

i assumed it wasnt terrible as it wasnt from 538 or berri or a kings "quant"

It was really bad, really bad. Much worse than that other article that compared offensive efficiency with the number of shooters, which was merely mediocre.

FYI I pointed out years ago that OReb% had a negative correlation with wins during round 1 of the TZ KLove saga.

FWIW nobody really cared

All of these studies suck imo because they aren't comparing apples to apples. Like the one that correlates offensive efficiency with the number of 3 point shooters in your lineup, and showed a that the efficiency increased as the number of 3 point shooters went up.

Well thanks for the hotsportstake. Shooting is a skill, so is finishing, passing, posting up, etc. That article tries to prove that shooting > whatever by comparing players with 1+ "skills" to players with 0+ "skills". I could have told him the results without even having to crunch numbers ffs.

It's just dumb. You can't compare stretch 4/5's (who have at least one NBA skills) with the rest of the league because it's littered with offensive zeros at that position. And that's not even accounting for the fact that there may be other issues on defense.

Anyway I don't think we'll know with any certainty whether or not a team with 2 traditional bigs is worse than a team full of stretchies, it would be way too hard to differentiate and get a large enough sample size. I do think there is inherent value in snatching up guys who are elite finishers/rebounders but horrible shooters because their value appears to have diminished.

Shooting provides spacing, but so does being able to rebound like crazy and finish.. I actually think the latter is more valuable because your PPP will be higher on a dunk/at-rim shot + Oreb than the 3 point shots many of these stretch bigs provide.

they still don't, lolthayer

the counter to that though dood( and i agree with what you've been arguing fwiw), is that the spacing stretch bigs provide allows your other players to finish at the rim at a higher rate than if they had a guy ready to get the oreb.

i dont think we'll ever know which attribute in a vaccuum is better but i dont think it really matters that much anyway. you need certain values from your team to be a contender. whether or not that role is filled by traditional position values shouldnt matter.

Regardless of that article my main point at the time was that: Yes, an offensive rebound is extremely valuable. Creating a new possession is extremely valuable. But when you take these obvious statements and then talk about how vital OREB% is and then you look at it having seemingly absolutely no correlation to winning basketball games(It was negative but saying no correlation seems more correct), then, what's the deal? Are we perhaps overvaluing a players OREB% stats and it's effect on winning basketball games? What other stats deemed valuable have 0 correlation? Is there perhaps negative value to 3 point shooters crashing the boards? etc.

I will note that in 2010 when the "best producing player in basketball" was leading his team to a 6-24 record, his OREB % was >15%. This year when I and countless others rated him much higher than in the past? 8.5%

lolthayer though

It's also worth noting that DREB% has a pretty significant correlation with winning

But:

(A) guys who are attacking the rim in volume are converting for higher TS%s at the rim than their stretch bigs away from it;

(B) these rim attackers who are primary/secondary scorers have lower TS%s from 15+ feet than stretch bigs on threes.

I don't see where the value of the stretch big exceeds that of ORebs on rosters without exceptionally efficient primary ball handlers like LeBron or CP3. Most basketballs are dominated are dominated by guys like Rose, Melo, Wall, Westbrook, Gay, Kobe who will score in high volumes but brick at higher rates in volume.

look, there is some optimal line re contesting and boxing out/dreb'ing as a big, and that line is ~what tim duncan does

Bad assumption. Most articles are bad and shouldn't be read.

haven't read the article yet, but this is a pretty standard technique in general

It will change how the team spends money.

Tim Leiweke was the guy who basically gave Masai the green light to do whatever he wanted. He also gave that power to the Leafs GM. His goal was to bring attention to the teams and create winning teams.

...

Well apparently MLSE likes making money without having to spend money. They look at the Raptors/Leafs/Toronto FC as assets and they like to be the ones who make decisions. Tim assumed power and just bulldozed through ****. That rubbed people the wrong way, he was only going to stay another year, so the ownership acted quickly in moving on. Their loss.

Also, the ownership is basically a board of directors. Over half the board includes Bell/Rogers peope, ie the Verizon Comcasts suck **** communication companies in Canada. Those dudes can't work together...much less coordinate decisions on a sports teams. Apparently it was really difficult dealing with those dudes.

Most Improved Player for 2014-2015 Season:

Kent Bazemore

Same as it ever was

It's just spacing plus generating 3pa, the latter of which is one of the best individual predictors of offensive efficiency. This article is just a basic look at the situation (the spacing article that's been linked several times itt is a more thorough take on it), but the overall evidence is pretty unambiguous.

as a statistician, you can safely laugh at the level of analysis from that blog post.

Side note: Does Ortg factor in possessions from O-rebs? I'm thinking there are two ways it could be calculated if a team misses a shot, gets an o-reb, and then scores.

A: This scenario is counted as two possessions and one score

B: This scenario is counted as one possession and one score, Orebs are essentially ignored.

If it's option A (if they add a +1 to possession for each Oreb), then no wonder there isn't a correlation between Oreb and Ortg, since Orebs are inherently part of the calculation for Ortg. Orebs just add to the total number of possessions but wouldn't actually change the points per possession efficiency in this case (of course they might by altering the type of shot, but let's ignore ceteris paribus).

the calculation for ortg is a very, very long formula that I don't want to spend too much time studying, but it looks like it's scenario A. It's tallying possessions and Orebs are in the calculations several times. lol that blog. spouts some very obvious truths about 'there might be tradeoff between your center shooting 3's and rebounding!' like it's new.

An analysis that would actually be good (well, not that great but at least better than this) would be to control for shooting and test the effect of Oreb on various efficiency ratings. The fact that Oreb is negatively correlated with 3pt shooting (which is a known + factor for efficiency) but is still neutral with efficiency suggest that Oreb could potentially have a + effect when you control for shooting.

It's B (though I wouldn't phrase canceling out a miss as ignoring it).

Well, orebs are very positive actions in isolation, so yes when tradeoffs are controlled for they'll end up positive.

its basketball..."basket"ball so the game is about buckets but hey man no rebounds no rings so u have to have that too and play defense. orgereg% man thats just stuff guys who dont want to think about their life come up but cant simply get into the flow with just the game u know every guy uses sports to not think about their life but for some guys that aint enough but they are smart enough to make up numbers with sports thats fine too i used to do both drink and drug man who am i to judge.

Raptors owned wouldn't even return DRAKE'S PHONE CALLS before Tim Leiweke arrived. Shows how much they know.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...board/follows/

"In recent years, the hip-hop star had reached out on several occasions to MLSE, wanting to get involved with the Raptors. He didn’t really care how. This wasn’t a business opportunity. This was a fan with leverage.

No one at MLSE ever returned his calls. Think about that. Seriously. If you’re a fan of any one of MLSE’s teams, have a long think about what you’re going back to.

Eventually, Drake gave up.

Shortly after taking the job in Toronto, Mr. Leiweke was back in L.A. having a friendly chat with Scooter Braun, the man who manages Justin Bieber’s musical career. Mr. Braun mentioned Drake’s interest. Mr. Leiweke made the call.

Drake had no suggestions as to his role. Mr. Leiweke dreamed up the global brand ambassador title. It was all done in days. The effect on the club’s continental reputation has been seismic."