Support NeoGAF

[Black Mamba]

I don't want to get into the definition of "advanced" (probably 'recent' or 'new' is a better moniker, I'll grant you that) but your suggestion that not knowing what stuff like Ortg means your basketball understanding is limited is fucking retarded.
Those type of stats don't grant you any insight that watching the fucking game wouldn't yield, it's useful for sites like basketball reference as it allow you easy sorting and give you a rough idea about how teams that you don't watch are doing.
But countering observations about the actual game with such stats betray a fundamental lack of understanding of the game of basketball, and being a dick about it is just sad.

A. Baseball traditionalists had the same arguments and were quite obviously wrong.

B. We're talking basic team stats, not advanced player stats, so while I understand the hate of advanced metrics for player stats because they're still missing a lot of information, team stats are missing zero information. We have an objective measure of scoring. It's called points. We also have an objective measure of pace, it's called possessions and plays. If you want to get into real advanced team stats, that's more like SRS. Measuring rebound rate, shot location, turnover percentage et al isn't advanced, it's simply tabulating more than the past.

C. Actually, those stats do tend to tell us things many people didn't understand. I remember half a decade ago when people, media analysts, and even basketball analysts would argue with me (or through tv/articles) that the GS Warriors were a great offensive team. They led (or were near the top) of the league in PPG! I (and those pioneering advanced stats) kept arguing they were about average at best. Well, their Offensive Efficiency was average at best, they just played at the league's highest pace which inflated their numbers. So lots of people misjudged them.

D. You sound like UnskewedPolls.com

E. It's vag. You have to know him to understand...

If you need advance stats to know that Monte Ellis sucks, you already failed at understanding basketball.
Fuck, the whole idea that he's a good basketball player come from people who spend more time reading box scores than watching the game.

Many people who watch basketball think he's a good player. Numerous GMs obviously have thought he's a good player. That's despite the fact that basic and advanced stats say he sucks. Obviously, people aren't very good at watching basketball.

You realize we live in a world where Joe Johnson and Shard make over $20 mil a year? Or someone gave Darko $4 mil a year recently? Or Richard Jefferson got something like $8 mil after $15 mil. Etc...

And you really think they're one composite stat away from seeing the light?
People who can't see how retarded it is for someone with his build to play like a shooting guard are not going to be convinced by math.

Yes. GMs are actually starting to learn. It's why Memphis traded away Gay to one of the worst GMs in the league for spare parts and knew they'd be better for it. Hopefully, when Monta doesn't get paid like he thinks he should, it will be another signal the GMs have embraced these stats more.

At the very least, if it's convincing owners to fire the traditionalists, it's a good thing.

 

[Red Blaster]

If you need advance stats to know that Monte Ellis sucks, you already failed at understanding basketball.
Fuck, the whole idea that he's a good basketball player come from people who spend more time reading box scores than watching the game.

most people don't understand basketball

we have people thinking eric bledsoe will be a good point guard even though his turnover rate is horrendous and he has zero idea how to run an offense, jrue holiday was selected as an all-star even though he's a rather awful offensive player, many thought the grizzlies made a mistake in trading away rudy gay

i don't understand why a more accepted use of advanced metrics is bad since at worst it lets people make more informed observations on top of what they see in a game, most people who use these stats are cognizant of their limitations and where potential confounding variables may arise.

 

[Chichikov]

A. Baseball traditionalists had the same arguments and were quite obviously wrong.

B. We're talking basic team stats, not advanced player stats, so while I understand the hate of advanced metrics for player stats because they're still missing a lot of information, team stats are missing zero information. We have an objective measure of scoring. It's called points. We also have an objective measure of pace, it's called possessions and plays. If you want to get into real advanced team stats, that's more like SRS. Measuring rebound rate, shot location, turnover percentage et al isn't advanced, it's simply tabulating more than the past.

C. Actually, those stats do tend to tell us things many people didn't understand. I remember half a decade ago when people, media analysts, and even basketball analysts would argue with me (or through tv/articles) that the GS Warriors were a great offensive team. They led (or were near the top) of the league in PPG! I (and those pioneering advanced stats) kept arguing they were about average at best. Well, their Offensive Efficiency was average at best, they just played at the league's highest pace which inflated their numbers. So lots of people misjudged them.

A. baseball is a very different sport than basketball, it's significantly easier to do effective and insightful in a sport like baseball.

B. I don't hate on advance stats, and for individual player they can even be useful, but those type of team stats really doesn't give you any sort of meaningful insight. It can be fun to rank team, but for real, giving shit for someone for not knowing what pace or ortg is like giving shit for someone who don't know that formula for passer rating.

C. And even with those stats, Mike D'Antoni is still considered an offensive genius (by some, people gave shit to run and gun variations well before ortg was a glimmer in some nerd's eye).
Also, for every good example, I can give you two bad ones, usually involved claiming that someone is better than Jordan.

i don't understand why a more accepted use of advanced metrics is bad since at worst it lets people make more informed observations on top of what they see in a game, most people who use these stats are cognizant of their limitations and where potential confounding variables may arise.

They're not a bad thing, didn't mean to claim that.
But when you having a discussion about basketball, dropping "LOL, you don't even know what pace is, your opinion is invalid" is fucking silly.

 

[Black Mamba]

I'm a math major, and trust me, no one came out looking good from that discussion..

I came out bad because I said I rather have the more efficient offense (or defend the less efficient one). What!?

Why would I rather have my team score 100 points in a game and take 105 possessions to do that than my team score 95 points and take 95 possessions to do so? How is the latter not objectively better?

And saying shit like "pacers offense not their defense is what keep them in the series" is beyond simplistic, and claiming to divine that from pace is downright silly

What? I specifically mentioned what aspect of their defense was the problem (defensive rebounding), to which IWMTB added to FT rate issue on top of it. It's not simplistic at all. It's specifically explaining what Miami's problem has been.

And nothing was divined from pace. Miami's defensive woes are defined by their inability to rebound and stop fouling, giving Indiana multiple looks and FTs. Pace simply tells us how efficient the offense and defense are, not the causes. We discussed the causes.

 

[Black Mamba]

A. baseball is a very different sport than basketball, it's significantly easier to do effective and insightful in a sport like baseball.

At the individual level, not the team level. If anything, baseball is much harder at the team level because it's dependent on who pitches that day, whereas basketball is much more consistent with lineups over time.

B. I don't hate on advance stats, and for individual player they can even be useful, but those type of team stats really doesn't give you any sort of meaningful insight. It can be fun to rank team, but for real, giving shit for someone for not knowing what pace or ortg is like giving shit for someone who don't know that formula for passer rating.

What? yes they do. For instance, many people will overlook what happens when a great defensive 3pt team meets an above average 3 pt team. Or Opponent FT rates. Or turnovers.

Matchups matter in the NBA and team stats like those gives us a bigger advantage at figuring them out. Also, we gave shit to Vag because he knows what pace is and yet ignores it.

It's no different that unskewed polls guy re-adjusting the numbers because it feels right.

C. And even with those stats, Mike D'Antoni is still considered an offensive genius (by some, people gave shit to run and gun variations well before ortg was a glimmer in some nerd's eye).
Also, for every good example, I can give you two bad ones, usually involved claiming that someone is better than Jordan.

Mike D'Antoni's Phx teams were great offensive teams. That people attribute that to MDA doesn't mean the stats are wrong. It just means people overrate the influence of coaching on stats.

And we're talking team stats, not individual ones. These team stats are objective, player stats not.

 

[Vahagn]

TheKad you're not even worth responding to. Your reading comprehension skills are just sad if you think I don't understand regression to the mean, pace, or ORtg.

Mamba - I asked you a ? - let me ask it again. If you were Indiana's defense would you rather Miami score 115 points on 104 ORTG or 95 points on 108 ORTG?

One scenario is higher PPG the other is a much more slowed down pace but more efficient Miami offense. What's better for Indiana, and by extension, Miami

 

[jobber]

Heat win 89-80 :|

Leonard played like ass but Manu stepped up.

Finals gonna suck confirmed.

 

[Fjordson]

So I was talking about the possible 2016 USA team for the Olympics with my brother, and he was saying Hibbert will start ahead of Dwight and lead them to glory. But isn't he technically Jamaican?

 

[Black Mamba]

TheKad you're not even worth responding to. Your reading comprehension skills are just sad if you think I don't understand regression to the mean, pace, or ORtg.

Mamba - I asked you a ? - let me ask it again. If you were Indiana's defense would you rather Miami score 115 points on 104 ORTG or 95 points on 108 ORTG?

One scenario is higher PPG the other is a much more slowed down pace but more efficient Miami offense. What's better for Indiana, and by extension, Miami

I already answered this. If I'm Indiana, I want the 115 points on 104 ORTG. Miami's offense is playing like shit in this case.

If I could bet, I would bet at 115 Indiana wins more than 50% of the time and at 95 Miami does.

Of course, your examples are pretty exteme. It's fucking hard to score 115 points at 104 ORTG in regulation. That must be a ton of turnovers and quick fouls.

 

[linsivvi]

They're not a bad thing, didn't mean to claim that.
But when you having a discussion about basketball, dropping "LOL, you don't even know what pace is, your opinion is invalid" is fucking silly.

He was poking fun at Vag and it was just a random insult due to his post history.

 

[jobber]

So I was talking about the possible 2016 USA team for the Olympics with my brother, and he was saying Hibbert will start ahead of Dwight and lead them to glory. But isn't he technically Jamaican?

Duncan wasn't born here and played for the US. Unlike the VI, I don't think Jamaica has a basketball team...or one good enough to make the qualifying tournament.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

I already answered this. If I'm Indiana, I want the 115 points on 104 ORTG. Miami's offense is playing like shit in this case.

If I could bet, I would bet at 115 Indiana wins more than 50% of the time and at 95 Miami does.

Of course, your examples are pretty exteme. It's fucking hard to score 115 points at 104 ORTG in regulation. That must be a ton of turnovers and quick fouls.

Pace of the game would have to be insane, lots of chucking, mistakes, TOs etc. But Indy didn't get more than 115 points all year. Its a silly question really. It'd be fuckball on crack.

 

[Fjordson]

Duncan wasn't born here and played for the US. Unlike the VI, I don't think Jamaica has a basketball team...or one good enough to make the qualifying tournament.

Ah okay, nice.

What about Kyrie? Would he play for the US in 2016?

 

[Vahagn]

I already answered this. If I'm Indiana, I want the 115 points on 104 ORTG. Miami's offense is playing like shit in this case.

If I could bet, I would bet at 115 Indiana wins more than 50% of the time and at 95 Miami does.

Of course, your examples are pretty exteme. It's fucking hard to score 115 points at 104 ORTG in regulation. That must be a ton of turnovers and quick fouls.

Ok. Indiana All season has scored over 115 points 1 time. Reg season + playoffs. One time.

Wanna guess how many times they've exceeded 108 ORTG? I'm counting 7 times and I'm about 25 games in.

So I think you're wrong. Indiana has a much higher chance mucking the game up and hitting 108 ORTG than they do of getting to a 116 points on any conceivable pace. They've only done it once all year.

Your bullshit "ORTG is superior in every case" and giving up 20 more points for every team defense as long as its on lower efficiency idea is just stupid, unfounded, and shows your lack of ability to think rationally and examine the evidence at hand. Instead of just Durr Durr you're dumb Vag, ORTG is always better.

The 2006 PHX Suns might be better served giving up 115 on lower efficiency because they can hit that kind of offensive production, but Indiana, through 90+ games, has shown that it can't.

 

[Black Mamba]

Pace of the game would have to be insane, lots of chucking, mistakes, TOs etc. But Indy didn't get more than 115 points all year. Its a silly question really. It'd be fuckball on crack.

127 possessions! Could be Miami fouling the fuck out of Indy. 60FT game!

I can't imagine an Indy game with that many possessions, though. I wonder how many regulation games get that high...

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Pace of the game would have to be insane, lots of chucking, mistakes, TOs etc. But Indy didn't get more than 115 points all year. Its a silly question really. It'd be fuckball on crack.

It would be a return to the wonderful 1960s where they had the best offenses though (look at the PPG!)

 

[Red Blaster]

They're not a bad thing, didn't mean to claim that.
But when you having a discussion about basketball, dropping "LOL, you don't even know what pace is, your opinion is invalid" is fucking silly.

rules are different when dealing with vag

but given that most people are idiots encouraging a more standard use of advanced stats is something we should strive for because at least they feature a level of objectivity. i feel that ts% will eventually overtake regular fg% as three pointers become more valued in nba offenses. one image that stuck with me is about two months ago on espn when basketball luddites magic johnson and jalen rose called bill simmons a nerd and laughed at him as he tried to explain that rudy gay being traded away for relatively nothing was a net positive overall for memphis

 

[Vahagn]

127 possessions! Could be Miami fouling the fuck out of Indy. 60FT game!

I can't imagine an Indy game with that many possessions, though. I wonder how many regulation games get that high...

Make it 95 pts per game on 108 ortg versus 115 on 98 ORTG - same general point applies.

 

[Black Mamba]

Ok. Indiana All season has scored over 115 points 1 time. Reg season + playoffs. One time.

Wanna guess how many times they've exceeded 108 ORTG? I'm counting 7 times and I'm about 25 games in.

So I think you're wrong. Indiana has a much higher chance mucking the game up and hitting 108 ORTG than they do of getting to a 116 points on any conceivable pace. They've only done it once all year.

Your bullshit "ORTG is superior in every case" and giving up 20 more points for every team defense as long as its on lower efficiency idea is just stupid, unfounded, and shows your lack of ability to think rationally and examine the evidence at hand. Instead of just Durr Durr you're dumb Vag, ORTG is always better.

The 2006 PHX Suns might be better served giving up 115 on lower efficiency because they can hit that kind of offensive production, but Indiana, through 90+ games, has shown that it can't.

When has Miami hit the 127 pace threshold!?!?

Miami scoring 115 almost always happens with less than 115 pace. Do you know the insanity of the pace in the example you gave? That's 1960s ball.

Miami scored over 115 a handful of times. The highest pace in any of those games was 100. You gave me an example with 127.

Make it 95 pts per game on 108 ortg versus 115 on 98 ORTG - same general point applies.

Still as a defense I want the 115.

and again, you have no idea the pace that is being played. I don't even know if the last time we've had a game like that 115 on 98.

 

[benjipwns]

115 on 98 ORTG

This game would be amazing.

 

[Vahagn]

When has Miami hit the 127 pace threshold!?!?

Miami scoring 115 almost always happens with less than 115 pace. Do you know the insanity of the pace in the example you gave? That's 1960s ball.

Miami scored over 115 a handful of times. The highest pace in any of those games was 100. You gave me an example with 127.

See above. Same point applies. Indiana has higher chance exceeding 108 ORTG on a 85-90 pace than they do exceeding 115 points

 

[Black Mamba]

This game would be amazing.

136 possession game.

Maybe it consists of a 4 minute stretch where the teams pass to one another back and forth?

See above. Same point applies. Indiana has higher chance exceeding 108 ORTG on a 85-90 pace than they do exceeding 115 points

In a game with 136 possessions they would almost certainly score 115 points. Jesus fucking christ.

edit: Well it is fuckball, so anything is possible. But more likely than not they would.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

This is an awesome discussion just for inspiring me to try to imagine Indiana getting off 136 possessions in a game considering that it takes them 18 seconds to pass the ball into the post. Lance Stephenson and Paul George would probably combine for 20 turnovers, lol.

 

[benjipwns]

Here's a 1990 game where the Nets scored 117 points on a 99.5 ORTG: http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199004060NJN.html

They only had to take 123 field goal attempts along with 43 FTA's AND get 37 offensive rebounds.

 

[Vahagn]

Here's a 1990 game where the Nets scored 117 points on a 99.5 ORTG: http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199004060NJN.html

They only had to take 123 field goal attempts along with 43 FTA's AND get 37 offensive rebounds.

That's so insane lol

Mamba, and you're the One that took that bait. Make it 95 points on 108 ORTG or 110 on 105 ORTG

The point always stands - Indiana, because of their limited offensive weapons, is better served tryna exceed 108ORTG and get 96 points in a Fuckball slow ass game than they are tryna get to 111 pts on any kind of do-able pace.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

I get what vag is trying to say which is, Indy has a better chance to win if the score is low, but he found a way to say that in the most ludicrous way possible.

"Would you rather Miami get 250 possessions but only be able to shoot half court hook shots or get their average attempts and then they eat your dog alive afterward?!"

 

[Black Mamba]

That's so insane lol

Mamba, and you're the One that took that bait. Make it 95 points on 108 ORTG or 110 on 105 ORTG

The point always stands - Indiana, because of their limited offensive weapons, is better served tryna exceed 108ORTG and get 96 points in a Fuckball slow ass game than they are tryna get to 111 pts on any kind of do-able pace.

Always I want the lower ORTG. Why is this so hard?

If Miami is scoring 110 on 105, chances are they're turning the ball over a ton and giving me layups. That or fouling the fuck out of me.

You're confused by pace. Pace can happen numerous ways. A slow game can have a high pace if there are a ton of fouls causing FTs. The game will be played slowly, but change of possession on the timecard is quick.

If you were to give me just pace, I'd take the slower pace for Indiana because a higher pace probably means indy is turning it over and Miami is dunking. But if you give me the actual offensive efficiency, I'm taking the lower one 100% of the time. You'd have to be a complete moron to do otherwise.

Most of the time when one team is very inefficient on offense, the other team benefits and does better.

 

[Vahagn]

I get what vag is trying to say which is, Indy has a better chance to win if the score is low, but he found a way to say that in the most ludicrous way possible.

"Would you rather Miami get 250 possessions but only be able to shoot half court hook shots or get their average attempts and then they eat your dog alive afterward?!"

It did get out of hand lol with a crazy pace hypothetical. But this is in response to Mamba and TheKad suggesting that Indiana keeping the score under a hundred through regulation in 3 of 4 games is somehow bad defense because Miami's ORTG is high and that Indiana would be better served with a significant scoring increase for Miami if it came under worse efficiency.

I don't buy that argument at all. The old metric of keep teams under a 100, while not accounting for pace and efficiency, is still how Indiana's defense should be judged because that's what gives them the best chance to win.

 

[benjipwns]

Worth also noting these two old posts from Dean Oliver on how slowing the pace improves the underdogs chances by shortening the game:
http://www.rawbw.com/~deano/articles/aa030597.htm
http://www.rawbw.com/~deano/articles/tempo.html

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

It did get out of hand lol with a crazy pace hypothetical. But this is in response to Mamba and TheKad suggesting that Indiana keeping the score under a hundred through regulation in 3 of 4 games is somehow bad defense because Miami's ORTG is high and that Indiana would be better served with a significant scoring increase for Miami if it came under worse efficiency.

I don't buy that argument at all. The old metric of keep teams under a 100, while not accounting for pace and efficiency, is still how Indiana's defense should be judged because that's what gives them the best chance to win.

Bill Russell was a terrible defender, his teams usually gave up 100+ points in games.

 

[Vahagn]

Always I want the lower ORTG. Why is this so hard?

If Miami is scoring 110 on 105, chances are they're turning the ball over a ton and giving me layups. That or fouling the fuck out of me.

You're confused by pace. Pace can happen numerous ways. A slow game can have a high pace if there are a ton of fouls causing FTs. The game will be played slowly, but change of possession on the timecard is quick.

If you were to give me just pace, I'd take the slower pace for Indiana because a higher pace probably means indy is turning it over and Miami is dunking. But if you give me the actual offensive efficiency, I'm taking the lower one 100% of the time. You'd have to be a complete moron to do otherwise.

Most of the time when one team is very inefficient on offense, the other team benefits and does better.

I never said very inefficient I said somewhat less efficient. A difference of 4-5 in ORTG isn't worth a difference of 15 points on the board for Indiana if were talking about a final score of 110-115. While Indiana has shown it can hit 108ortg with some frequency, it hasn't shown an ability to exceed 110 or 115 with anything near the same frequency.

 

[Black Mamba]

It did get out of hand lol with a crazy pace hypothetical. But this is in response to Mamba and TheKad suggesting that Indiana keeping the score under a hundred through regulation in 3 of 4 games is somehow had defense because Miami's ORTG is high and that Indiana would be better served with a significant scoring increase for Miami if it came under worse efficiency.

I don't buy that argument at all. The old metric of keep teams under a 100, while not accounting for pace and efficiency, is still how Indiana's defense should be judged because that's what gives them the best chance to win.

First off, I never said Indiana has played bad defense. I specifically said Miami is playing bad defense and that's why Indy tied up the series.

Miami averages 112 OEff and in this series is 117. But one game skewed that. In the other 3 Miami was above average, below average, and just about average. All in all I'd say Indiana's defense has been okay and times while Miami's offense has been good in 3 games (for them).

If you told me Miami would hit their average ORtg which they've basically done for 3 games, I'd bet they won the game because I figure their defense wouldn't let Indy go from bad to great.

I don't think you appreciate how much better Indy's offense is than normal in this series. FTs and Rebounding being why. Their OReb rate would be the greatest of all time!

I never said very inefficient I said somewhat less efficient. A difference of 4-5 in ORTG isn't worth a difference of 15 points on the board for Indiana if were talking about a final score of 110-115. While Indiana has shown it can hit 108ortg with some frequency, it hasn't shown an ability to exceed 110 or 115 with anything near the same frequency.

You never said inefficient but give me ludicrous examples of inefficient offenses, lol.

Look, Miami's worst ORTG this season while hitting 115 points or more is...115. Think about that.

 

[Vahagn]

Bill Russell was a terrible defender, his teams usually gave up 100+ points in games.

Because a team of 7 HOF'ers that got you 115 a game in their sleep is the same as a team with none which can hit that mark once lol

 

[benjipwns]

Bill Russell was a terrible defender, his teams usually gave up 100+ points in games.

The 1965 Celtics would have beat just the Kings this year in points allowed per game.

 

[Black Mamba]

Because a team of 7 HOF'ers that got you 115 a game in their sleep is the same as a team with none which can hit that mark once lol

Miami only hit 115 in regulation 5 times. And again, never worse than 115ORtg.

Your examples are so absurd.

It should also be stated that Miami and Indy play at basically the same pace. And the highest and lowest paced teams are only different by 8 possessions.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Because a team of 7 HOF'ers that got you 115 a game in their sleep is the same as a team with none which can hit that mark once lol

Watch a game from the 1960s.

Tell me that the teams are playing good and effective offense just because both end up over 100 points.

 

[Vahagn]

First off, I never said Indiana has played bad defense. I specifically said Miami is playing bad defense and that's why Indy tied up the series.

Miami averages 112 OEff and in this series is 117. But one game skewed that. In the other 3 Miami was above average, below average, and just about average. All in all I'd say Indiana's defense has been okay and times while Miami's offense has been good in 3 games (for them).

If you told me Miami would hit their average ORtg which they've basically done for 3 games, I'd bet they won the game because I figure their defense wouldn't let Indy go from bad to great.

I don't think you appreciate how much better Indy's offense is than normal in this series. FTs and Rebounding being why. Their OReb rate would be the greatest of all time!



You never said inefficient but give me ludicrous examples of inefficient offenses, lol.

Look, Miami's worst ORTG this season while hitting 115 points or more is...115. Think about that.

Indy and Miami have had pretty impressive ORTG's this series, yet Indiana hasn't cracked a hundred once. It's efficient in its possessions, but takes 18 seconds minimum each possession to shoot and can never hit 115. And you expect them to hit 116 based off of what? their ORTG being high?

Edit: the point is - Indiana can win a 95 point game. It can't win a 115 point game. Definitely not more than once a series. To suggest that's a better option for them means you're over thinking the game and the significance of +/- 5Ortg

 

[Black Mamba]

Indy and Miami have had pretty impressive ORTG's this series, yet Indiana hasn't cracked a hundred once. It's efficient in its possessions, but takes 18 seconds minimum each possession to shoot and can never hit 115. And you expect them to hit 116 based off of what? their ORTG being high?

No, the fact that you set up a game with 136 possessions.

A team that averages almost 105 per 100 will most likely score 115 over 136.

I don't think you understand how hard it is to score 115 in today's NBA while also being inefficient. At all.

Maybe this will help. if Miami scored 115, I guarantee you they are having a great game offensively and no way have an ORTG below 110.

 

[Vahagn]

No, the fact that you set up a game with 136 possessions.

A team that averages almost 105 per 100 will most likely score 115 over 136.

I don't think you understand how hard it is to score 115 in today's NBA while also being inefficient. At all.

Maybe this will help. if Miami scored 115, I guarantee you they are having a great game offensively and no way have an ORTG below 110.

I switched up the parameters for you already. 110 on 105 ORTG or 95 on 108 ORTG

You said the second. My response is that Indy has shown a much greater ability to exceed 108 ORTG this series and get to 95 points than it has getting to 110 points, even when it hits 115 ORTG

How is this so difficult.


Edit: game 4 is an example. Indiana got to 124 Ortg and still only scored 99. They can do that by slowing the game down and being super efficient. What they can't do is get to 115 on fucking any kind of ORTG. They just don't have the offensive weapons to put that many points on the board

 

[DY_nasty]

I won't miss this.

 

[Black Mamba]

I switched up the parameters for you already. 110 on 105 ORTG or 95 on 108 ORTG

You said the second. My response is that Indy has shown a much greater ability to exceed 108 ORTG this series and get to 95 points than it has getting to 110 points, even when it hits 115 ORTG

How is this so difficult.

That is still a ridiculous scenario, dude. Do you understand how few games hit 105 possessions? Or even 100? That's still a 115 possession game.

Either we're going to double OT or it's just stupid.

Miami is not scoring 110 at below 105 ORTG. And if they are, Indiana will win that game probably 90% of the time.

Fucking Vag: http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201302200IND.html

It's hilarious how Vag talks about Indy not able to score 115 (they've done it twice in regulation) while Miami has only done it 5 times..

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

The argument that giving up less than 100 points is good defense is just dumb regardless of the fact that Lance Stephenson probably would break turnover records if the Pacers upped the pace to 136 possessions a game.

The Heat have been historically bad at rebounding and at giving up free throws in this series and Hibbert can get whatever they want, but they've kept the Pacers under 100 points, are they playing good defense?

 

[Vahagn]

That is still a ridiculous scenario, dude. Do you understand how few games hit 105 possessions? Or even 100? That's still a 115 possession game.

Either we're going to double OT or it's just stupid.

Miami is not scoring 110 at below 105 ORTG. And if they are, Indiana will win that game probably 90% of the time.

Fucking Vag: http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201302200IND.html

It's hilarious how Vag talks about Indy not able to score 115 (they've done it twice in regulation) while Miami has only done it 5 times..

They've gone above 115 one time. You linked to it. They still get to 108 ortg FAR MORE OFTEN then they get to 110 points. How is this so difficult to grasp?

 

[Doomsayer]

This thread, this fucking thread.

I'm going to the loserbro thread.

 

[Black Mamba]

They've gone above 115 one time. You linked to it. They still get to 108 ortg FAR MORE OFTEN then they get to 110 points. How is this so difficult to grasp?

Miami only did it 5 times and each time they were amazing on offense.

What do you not get? Your examples are ludicrous and you'd have to be a moron not to take the 110 on 105 if you're indy.

Indy has scored 115 twice and in neither game had as many possessions as the example you give.

GUYS, IF MIAMI SCORES 115 ON 55 ORTG, WILL INDIANA TAKE THAT!?

 

[Vahagn]

The argument that giving up less than 100 points is good defense is just dumb regardless of the fact that Lance Stephenson probably would break turnover records if the Pacers upped the pace to 136 possessions a game.

The Heat have been historically bad at rebounding and at giving up free throws in this series and Hibbert can get whatever they want, but they've kept the Pacers under 100 points, are they playing good defense?

Indiana giving up less than a 100 points on 105-108 ORTG gives them a solid chance to win. Those are the parameters I discussed dude. Stop being obtuse.

Miami is keeping the score low, but they're not rebounding defensively well at all which is shooting down their number of possessions in relation to Indiana.


I think the general idea that Miami would do best to get above 100 points and Indiana would do best to keep Miami around 93-95 PPG is more important than looking ORTG.

 

[Vahagn]

Miami only did it 5 times and each time they were amazing on offense.

What do you not get? Your examples are ludicrous and you'd have to be a moron not to take the 110 on 105 if you're indy.

Indy has scored 115 twice and in neither game had as many possessions as the example you give.

GUYS, IF MIAMI SCORES 115 ON 55 ORTG, WILL INDIANA TAKE THAT!?

Way to misrepresent my position

 

[Black Mamba]

I agree, Indy giving up less than 100 on 105-108 ORTG gives them a shot to win.

However, Indy giving up 110 on no more than 105 ORTG gives them a far better chance of winning. It's also a ridiculous scenario.

If it's just 105 vs 105, then it's equal.

 

[Nori Chan]

what's going on

 

[Psychological Intellect]

get a room you guys