Comments on: Game 45 Recap: Bulls 92, Bucks 83

By: chitown4life

chitown4life — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 17:23:21 +0000

@ luke thanks for pointing that out to me, sometimes I get caught in the moment of the comments .I just have so much to say sometimes but yr point you made has been taken thanks again.
Peace

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 17:28:24 +0000

i entirely agree with you, luke. but you have to admit the irony of you not finishing that last sentence with a period. :p

and i feel like even though bogans is a good defender, ronnie brewer would still be a much more suitable option at shooting guard. and granted, he still gets his minutes, it’d be nice for him to give the bulls a rush of life from the start of the game, as opposed to coming off the bench. he’s a better defender than bogans, and is a more versatile, athletic player. he may not be able to space the floor well for d-rose, but he fills up the stat sheet in a variety of ways, and can get to the rim.

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:29:26 +0000

hahaha I am going to have to somewhat agree with what I can understand of chitown4life. I’m telling you man, if you used periods your point would come across a lot stronger

By: chitown4life

chitown4life — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:48:20 +0000

@ Tbf bogans is not a scorer we all know that , but to his defense and yes I said to his defense I think he is a very good defender which what he does not score makes up, for on the D side of the game which means even his mins are low but there are stats that do not show up on the score board which allows certain players to not get there just do of credit but the team and the coaches know it so , might want to just look outside the stats of bogans game and watch what he does on the court as a player its not always tight but on most nights he gets the job done
i have been paying more attention to him on that side of his game . Peace Go bulls D Rose MVP

By: TBF

TBF — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 06:53:54 +0000

Another game, another night of invisibility for our man Bogans. 0 points, 1 board, 1 block, 1 assist in 14 minutes. It’s almost like a Saturday Night Live skit with him anymore! Watch as the invisible man plays basketball!

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 06:28:20 +0000

I like it matt. I completely agree with every last word you just wrote. Thats what I love about basketball… it takes more than looking at a box score to truly understand the value of a player.

I just really enjoy hollinger’s take because A.) I enjoy and believe in math, B.) Its about as purely objective as you can be. I also enjoy how it helps point out certain aspects of a player’s game that is very difficult sometimes to be aware of by just watching the game, i.e. a player’s efficiency. Yes, we all notice when DRose is having a bad shooting night. But that’s not all efficiency is about. I love the % statistics off ball possession, team shots, etc. While I agree it does not define a player, its nice to have those as supplemental aid in determining a player’s ability.

And on a completely other note… I’ve been looking at the schedule, and if Noah can come back and make an impact very early on, and we stay healthy, 60 wins is not too far of a stretch for this team…

By: Inception

Inception — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 04:17:24 +0000

@Luvabull, agree with your point about Rose and the added risk of injury with all the contact he is taking when drawing fouls….he’s already suffering from a back injury…could that be the result of all the fouls he’s beginning to take now? who knows….i guess it’s the price you have to pay as a superstar….MJ surely took his hard hits back in the day (bads boys, knicks).

i just hope Rose’s body can hold up for the season….one thing in Derrick’s favor – the guy can play with pain…he’s already playing with turf toe.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 02:33:49 +0000

Sorry never said specifically I used the Value Added/Wins Added for ranking players according to Hollinger but PER fairly similar.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 02:30:58 +0000

I’d agree that statistical analysis represents perhaps the only truly objective measure of a player’s impact (Reading your last paragraph I think I agree with you more than I thought before), but basketball doesn’t really match up to stats as much as we might see with a sport like Football and especially Baseball. Many of the truly great players (Bird, Jorden, Russell, Magic, and maybe Lebron in time) combined multiple roles.
This is fundamentally different from other American sports. For instance a pitcher does have a definitive job: pitch. A batter’s ability can easily be measured statistically by how often they hit the ball (with the exception of the occasional bunt or sacrifice flyball players get credit for pretty much everything they do). Personally I think this is why Baseball is so boring to watch, you might as just well read the box score after to see how a player performed.
Basketball on the other hand demands context, so lets compare who we actually think is a great player and what Hollinger’s stats say is a great player.
JJ Redick ranks 29th on SGs. Meaning if a team were picking a starting shooting guard just for this season he would be the last SG chosen. However, his impact and value to a team can be tremendous because he has the ability to stretch the floor. Even though he is ranked 14 spots below Vince Carter I’d still rather see him in a Bulls uniform (just let me dream). I’d definitely prefer him to Tracy McGrady who ranks 25th. Even more ridiculous is Ron Artests rank as the 33rd most valuable SF. His defensive abilities and other hustle type of plays are what make him far more important as a player.
Granted Hollinger has more calculations than I could understand if this were actually my job (I wish), but this little rant highlights my fundamental problems with his approach. Its a great way to speak impartially about how a player stacks up against a certain criteria, but its all has to go back to watching games. Its a subjective game and its unavoidable and a certain degree of talking past each other is inevitable.

By: Luvabull

Luvabull — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:51:51 +0000

The one thing that Hollinger missed is that if D-Rose blows by the defenders so quickly and avoids contact but gets to the basket and scores, it doesn’t really matter that he gets the foul calls. Do I want my 6’3″ 190+ lbs. PG takeing hacks from 6’9″+, 250+ lbs gorillas patroling the paint? Let’s look the pros (getting fouled) and cons (avoiding contact):

The pros are that he’s likely to score 2-3 points more for every 10 shots at the rim. The other team accumulates fouls putting the Bulls in bonus early.

The cons are D-Rose could suffer serious injury. He may look more for contact than a pass to a teamate for an easy bucket. It could interrupt the flow/momentum of the game. Of course there are times when it is avantages to do that.

My point is that stats don’t necessarily account for the ebb and flow of the game. As long as D-Rose is making the right plays for the team to win the game, it does not matter if he gets fouled or not.