| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The epak stats
Current Stats 2019.1113 (10 games)
Offense:
3PT%: 31.8% (rank: 26th)
FT%: 73.3% (rank: 22nd)
FG%: 47.2% (rank: 4th)
TOV%: 14.2% (rank: 9th)
Defense:
DFG%: 42.3% (rank: 5th - Opponents ave FG%: 45.5)
DFG Diff%: -3.2% (Rank: 3rd) - we're holding them almost 3% below their average
Deflections: 15.5 (rank: 14th)
Charges drawn: 1.4 (rank: 3rd) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aprevo15
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 5923
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | The epak stats
Current Stats 2019.1113 (10 games)
Offense:
3PT%: 31.8% (rank: 26th)
FT%: 73.3% (rank: 22nd)
FG%: 47.2% (rank: 4th)
TOV%: 14.2% (rank: 9th)
Defense:
DFG%: 42.3% (rank: 5th - Opponents ave FG%: 45.5)
DFG Diff%: -3.2% (Rank: 3rd) - we're holding them almost 3% below their average
Deflections: 15.5 (rank: 14th)
Charges drawn: 1.4 (rank: 3rd) |
Gotta improve that FT%. Yesterday's game should have been an easy win if we made most of our free throws. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
durden-tyler
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | Durden-tyler, appreciate those stats man.
I will say though, not sure if I agree with the color bands.
I should it be more like 1-7 is good, 8-16 is average and 17+ is bad? Totally arbitrary I know. Just wondering what your thoughts are on that. |
I'm open to change it, but 17 seems low to be considered bad don't you think ? For me if you're number 17 in a 30 teams league, that's the definition of average...
What about one more color ?
1-7 : GOOD
8-15 : ABOVE AVERAGE
16-23 : BELOW AVERAGE
24-30 : BAD
Green-blue-orange-red in this order ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
durden-tyler
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
11 games
OFFRTG : 108.5 (11) ↑
DEFRTG : 99.5 (1) ↑
NETRTG : +9.0 (2) ↑ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cathy78
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jan 2013
Posts: 1415
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| durden-tyler wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Durden-tyler, appreciate those stats man.
I will say though, not sure if I agree with the color bands.
I should it be more like 1-7 is good, 8-16 is average and 17+ is bad? Totally arbitrary I know. Just wondering what your thoughts are on that. |
I'm open to change it, but 17 seems low to be considered bad don't you think ? For me if you're number 17 in a 30 teams league, that's the definition of average...
What about one more color ?
1-7 : GOOD
8-15 : ABOVE AVERAGE
16-23 : BELOW AVERAGE
24-30 : BAD
Green-blue-orange-red in this order ? |
1-5 is acceptable. Everything else is bad and should be punished. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| durden-tyler wrote: | 11 games
OFFRTG : 108.5 (11) ↑
DEFRTG : 99.5 (1) ↑
NETRTG : +9.0 (2) ↑ |
Winning will do that.
I love it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
durden-tyler
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | | durden-tyler wrote: | 11 games
OFFRTG : 108.5 (11) ↑
DEFRTG : 99.5 (1) ↑
NETRTG : +9.0 (2) ↑ |
Winning will do that.
I love it. |
I'd say "playing the Warriors" will do that... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
durden-tyler
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| At the end of december I think we'll know more what this team is made of, because we'll have an easy schedule in November, and a really hard one in december... I anticipate december will remind us we're an average offensive team... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPO200
Star Player
Joined: 28 Jun 2018
Posts: 1458
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mavericks
@Nuggets
@Jazz
Blazers
Timberwolves
@Magic
@Heat
@Hawks
@Pacers
@Bucks
Nuggets
Clippers
@Blazers
Mavericks
5 aways homes in the East. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| durden-tyler wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Durden-tyler, appreciate those stats man.
I will say though, not sure if I agree with the color bands.
I should it be more like 1-7 is good, 8-16 is average and 17+ is bad? Totally arbitrary I know. Just wondering what your thoughts are on that. |
I'm open to change it, but 17 seems low to be considered bad don't you think ? For me if you're number 17 in a 30 teams league, that's the definition of average...
What about one more color ?
1-7 : GOOD
8-15 : ABOVE AVERAGE
16-23 : BELOW AVERAGE
24-30 : BAD
Green-blue-orange-red in this order ? |
Well, I brought it up more as a fun discussion, I think it's probably fine the way you have it. But there's also a factor of the distribution of the data too. For instance, if you have 16 of the 30 teams doing something 10 times a game and 14 of the 30 teams doing something 1 time per game, the average is 5.8 -- but ranking on rank would make the 16th team "average" but really they are well above the average.
To give a real world example of this .... the average FG% for a team is 45.3%. The top 20 teams have a FG% of 45.0% or greater while the bottom 10 teams have a FG% of 44.4% or worse.
So even using a more refined tiers system using ranks like you have above, it would put a team shooting slightly above the average FG% in the "below average" category. (Example, the 16th best FG% team is the Clippers at 45.8%) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
durden-tyler
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2019 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | durden-tyler wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Durden-tyler, appreciate those stats man.
I will say though, not sure if I agree with the color bands.
I should it be more like 1-7 is good, 8-16 is average and 17+ is bad? Totally arbitrary I know. Just wondering what your thoughts are on that. |
I'm open to change it, but 17 seems low to be considered bad don't you think ? For me if you're number 17 in a 30 teams league, that's the definition of average...
What about one more color ?
1-7 : GOOD
8-15 : ABOVE AVERAGE
16-23 : BELOW AVERAGE
24-30 : BAD
Green-blue-orange-red in this order ? |
Well, I brought it up more as a fun discussion, I think it's probably fine the way you have it. But there's also a factor of the distribution of the data too. For instance, if you have 16 of the 30 teams doing something 10 times a game and 14 of the 30 teams doing something 1 time per game, the average is 5.8 -- but ranking on rank would make the 16th team "average" but really they are well above the average.
To give a real world example of this .... the average FG% for a team is 45.3%. The top 20 teams have a FG% of 45.0% or greater while the bottom 10 teams have a FG% of 44.4% or worse.
So even using a more refined tiers system using ranks like you have above, it would put a team shooting slightly above the average FG% in the "below average" category. (Example, the 16th best FG% team is the Clippers at 45.8%) |
Interesting, I'll try to think about it. I'm not that much of a math guy, but using your example of FG%, right now league average is 45.3%. We could consider "average" the 10 teams who are near this FG% (5 above, 5 under).
FG% for each team
GOOD would be 1 to 12
AVERAGE woul be 13 to 22
BAD would be 23 to 30
Am I completely off ??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scout0_0
Starting Rotation
Joined: 06 Jul 2019
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| plz update |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 10758
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
LET THE MAN SLEEP!
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
defense
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 39451
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
My advanced stats indicate that...
We da best! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25086
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| How u motivate everybody especially the bigs on defense... let em touch the ball!!! We doin it fellas! Tacos tacos tacos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| durden-tyler wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | durden-tyler wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Durden-tyler, appreciate those stats man.
I will say though, not sure if I agree with the color bands.
I should it be more like 1-7 is good, 8-16 is average and 17+ is bad? Totally arbitrary I know. Just wondering what your thoughts are on that. |
I'm open to change it, but 17 seems low to be considered bad don't you think ? For me if you're number 17 in a 30 teams league, that's the definition of average...
What about one more color ?
1-7 : GOOD
8-15 : ABOVE AVERAGE
16-23 : BELOW AVERAGE
24-30 : BAD
Green-blue-orange-red in this order ? |
Well, I brought it up more as a fun discussion, I think it's probably fine the way you have it. But there's also a factor of the distribution of the data too. For instance, if you have 16 of the 30 teams doing something 10 times a game and 14 of the 30 teams doing something 1 time per game, the average is 5.8 -- but ranking on rank would make the 16th team "average" but really they are well above the average.
To give a real world example of this .... the average FG% for a team is 45.3%. The top 20 teams have a FG% of 45.0% or greater while the bottom 10 teams have a FG% of 44.4% or worse.
So even using a more refined tiers system using ranks like you have above, it would put a team shooting slightly above the average FG% in the "below average" category. (Example, the 16th best FG% team is the Clippers at 45.8%) |
Interesting, I'll try to think about it. I'm not that much of a math guy, but using your example of FG%, right now league average is 45.3%. We could consider "average" the 10 teams who are near this FG% (5 above, 5 under).
FG% for each team
GOOD would be 1 to 12
AVERAGE woul be 13 to 22
BAD would be 23 to 30
Am I completely off ??? |
I think maybe the best, simple way to do it, would be to look at the numbers for each team, and then they are dark green if more than say 15 percent above the average, and light green if above 5 percent (but less than 15 pct), and do it that way.
But ummm that’s a lot more work so I get it. Maybe I’ll take a stab at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 10758
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
on the one hand I'm kind of worried about our offense but on the other hand I think that'll be minimized greatly in the playoffs
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
durden-tyler
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
12 games
OFFRTG : 108.2 (12) down
DEFRTG : 99.8 (1) =
NETRTG : +8.4 (2) = |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Polarbear
Star Player
Joined: 03 Nov 2003
Posts: 6129
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You don’t want to be peaking right now make weaknesses strengths as we go along |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakersLV
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Oct 2019
Posts: 625
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Our "shooters" 3pt%
Danny Green 41%
Quinn Cook 33%
Troy Daniels 31%
Kyle Kuzma 30%
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope 30%
Avery Bradley 28%
Alex Caruso 26%
This is embarrassing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerLogic
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 17886
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kuzma shooting above 40% from 3 in his last 4. Let's hope that continues.
We need KCP to get back to 35%+. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pio2u
Retired Number
Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 54573
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Lakers defense has been stout (thanks to CFV & staff) but scoring has not been as good. We have two of the best offensive players in the NBA but the team is below league average in points per game (19th with 109.9 per game).
The main culprit of the teams offensive woes is 3-point shooting. The FO's plan was to surround LBJ with shooters; so far our shooters have not met expectations for the most part.
The Lakers rank 27th in three-pointers made per game and 26th in three-point percentage, shooting 32 percent.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerLogic
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 17886
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pio2u wrote: | The Lakers defense has been stout (thanks to CFV & staff) but scoring has not been as good. We have two of the best offensive players in the NBA but the team is below league average in points per game (19th with 109.9 per game).
The main culprit of the teams offensive woes is 3-point shooting. The FO's plan was to surround LBJ with shooters; so far our shooters have not met expectations for the most part.
The Lakers rank 27th in three-pointers made per game and 26th in three-point percentage, shooting 32 percent. |
We only have 1 playmaker. That won't cut it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pio2u
Retired Number
Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 54573
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakersLV wrote: | Our "shooters" 3pt%
Danny Green 41%
Quinn Cook 33%
Troy Daniels 31%
Kyle Kuzma 30%
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope 30%
Avery Bradley 28%
Alex Caruso 26%
This is embarrassing. |
The Lakers rank 27th in three-pointers made per game and 26th in three-point percentage. smh |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pio2u wrote: | | LakersLV wrote: | Our "shooters" 3pt%
Danny Green 41%
Quinn Cook 33%
Troy Daniels 31%
Kyle Kuzma 30%
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope 30%
Avery Bradley 28%
Alex Caruso 26%
This is embarrassing. |
The Lakers rank 27th in three-pointers made per game and 26th in three-point percentage. smh |
i dont know why you guys get so worked up over percentages (other than ft% that is).
so what?? so our 3point shooters aren't the highest percentage in the league. Would you rather have our 3pt% be very high and NOT be 10-2?? Maybe we can be like the Pistons and be 4-9 with great 3pt% looooll!!
Also, check your expectations. I heard a lot expecting our KCP or green type guys to hit like 45% 3pt. I'm like, you realize if someone did that, they would be like the greatest 3pt shooter of all time. so be realistic here.
If we want our 3pt% higher, lebron needs to stop having the ball for so many seconds. But that's not really going to happen. SO what. instead we'll just be 10-2 with a bad %, I'll take that. This is what i say...look at lebron's %...he's also at 30%, i dont hear anyone complaining. He also probably takes more than anyone else. He also takes DUMB heat checks as if he were curry or lillard or kobe, and he misses nearly all of them, especially if they are remotely contested. But that's the forumla so far to 10-2. So...big whoop.
But to try to change things to get higher 3pt% is dumb to me. We should just be trying to win, forget %. If we win and shoot the worst in league history, thats totally fine, who cares. So many of the "statsies" (i saw this term here somewhere) you guys take these numbers to places they shouldn't go. you can't look at missed threes in a game, and then see we lost by 7, and say, well if only kcp and green hit 3 more threes, we would have won. which is what you do, and it doesn't work that way.
you can hit a high % and still lose. you can hit a low% and still win. when there are players that are trying to get a good %, that would worry me as a coach because it is taking effort away from trying to win. I wouldn't EVER want to see a player on the court thinking about getting an extra rebound, or assist, or basically anything other than more points. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
