# Who would have thought??



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

a year later that Nazr would become the the most valuable player involved in the TT/Naz-Doleac/KVH trade..


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

He is doing well. I can't really pick on him now...


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Here's a stat I found interesting. He currently ranks 12th in efficiency per 48 mins.

That's pretty good by any measure, but especially considering his slow start.


----------



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

Of course now that Nazr's doing well he ends up linked to VC in all the trade rumors. I swear, if Isiah trades anyone other than Penny and TT, I'll have a first class conniption. Someone help me out--are we in worse cap hell if we take VC and Rose or do they come off the books around the same time as Houston/TT/Hardaway? You know what, don't even answer me bc here's the deal. You have to be an *idiot*, or way too close to the situation (ie. coach, player, or GM (uh-oh)) to think we have a real chance at contending for a title right now. Even if we got to the Eastern Conference finals somehow, even if anything can happen in a best of 7, there's no way this team is built to win at present. Right now it looks like the following teams are significantly better than the Knicks: Seattle, Phoenix, San Antonio, Minnesota, Sacramento, Dallas, Miami. I'd put, at this point, LAL and LAC, as well as Cleveland and Washington and probably Denver ahead as well. That's 12 teams without even thinking hard. What are we gonna do with an injury-prone, sulking, optionally one-dimensional undersized SF that will close that gap in talent/chemistry/defensive commitment? Especially if it costs us Nazr right as he begins to semi-bloom and esp. if it costs us the expiring contract chips that could really produce blockbuster trades for unquestionably bluechip players in the next few years. I mean what if Kobe gets really unhappy and LAL wants to truly rebuild? What if King James wants a big-market throne? What if Amare wants out? Etfreaking cetera. Isiah's fascination with VC (assuming the papers aren't entirely wrong about this) stinks of business rather than on-court strategy, of a desire to always be fiddling instead of understanding which years are the THE years to risk everything and which are the hang back and take the criticism ones. I really hope IT has the patience, the support, and the clarity to stay clear of VC no matter what (TT+true filler I would do--nothing else). I've ranked on Nazr before but he's showing some real sustain right now and i'm ready to call him an untradeable asset (in a year where there's no reasont to go for broke, precisely because we're still broken). I wake up every morning with a prayer on my lips and it goes like this: pleaselordlettheBlazersswoopinanddealRahim, pleaselordlettheMetsbailonAlouandtryforBeltran, pleaselordletCrawfordexperienceshotselection, pleaselordletWilkensplaySweetneymore. Etfreaking cetera


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

EFF per 48 tends to favor rebounders. Drew Gooden also has a higher EFF per 48 than a bunch of all-stars.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> EFF per 48 tends to favor rebounders. Drew Gooden also has a higher EFF per 48 than a bunch of all-stars.


yes and no. EFF/48 isn't much different than reg EFF. And while EFF likes rebounds it also likes FG%, steals, assists, blocks, and low turnovers. 

Here is the formula:

Efficiency Formula: ((PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK) - ((FGA - FGM) + (FTA - FTM) + TO)) / G

So in NM's case it's primarily his rebs, but in conjunction with points, high FG%, decent FT%, and low turnovers.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

EFF per 48 is a far better measure than regular EFF,with one stipulation.

If the player is very foul prone,i.e 3 fouls while avg 12 minutes per,EFF/48 is very misleading.In that scenario the player would only last 24 minutes.It would take him 2 games to get his 48 minutes..

So,to be accurate,EFF per 48 favors guys who commit fouls if you think of 48 minutes as 1 game

But it is still the most consistent measure..

Face it..Naz is an elite center in the east..scary


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

Nazr just needs to learn how to block shots....

lets take a look at the centers in the east. First our division:

Boston- id say nazr is better then Blount pretty easily.

Philly- Dalembert hasnt done crap, and Marc Jackson isnt that good either. 

Toronto- Woods? lol. Araujo. lol.

Nets- Mournings out again, and he wasnt that good to begin with. Collins stinks.

the best center in the divsion after Nazr is Dalembert.

then theres Brendan Haywood in Washington. I like him over nazr cause of his blocks and offensive boards.

Zydrunas in cleveland is obviously better.

i dont have to mention shaq. 

Detroit- big ben or sheed....

indiana- well if you count oneal as a center...but nazr is definitely better then foster and pollard.

milwaukee- worst.frontline.ever? i dont even know who plays center for them anymore. Gadzuric?

Chicago- Eddy curry is a worse shotblocker then nazr, shoots a lower percentage as well. Nazr is better then curry.. yup. Curry also averages a whole lot of turnovers.

orlando- yeah hes better then cato and battie.

charlotte- duh....brezec is overrated.

atlanta- obviously. 

so theres hardly any centers better then nazr really. 

top 5 in the east:
Shaq
Z
Ben wallace
Haywood
Nazr


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

He is doing well. I can't really pick on him now...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

penny,its hard to believe that he is a top 5,but its true..there really arent that many really good 5's,which is why i can not believe zeke would trade him so quickly...though i am sure Tin Man Foyle could be "pried" away..i thought Chris mullin was smart.that was the worst signing this summer


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Stepping away from the east a moment, Nazr seems to compare well statistically to Magliore, and has a similar build. Is Magliore much better than him defensively that doesn't show up in stats? This year at least Nazr is besting him at blocks and steals.

Could it be said that Isiah found a Magliore caliber player wasting away as a backup in Atlanta?

Now if only TT could return to norm we'd see some wins for it.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> EFF per 48 is a far better measure than regular EFF,with one stipulation.


Amare > Shaq
Danny Fortson > Shaq

Nazr Mohammed, Drew Gooden, and Raef LaFrentz > Yao Ming, Zach Randolph, Elton Brand, and Paul Pierce.

Larry Hughes and Manu Ginobili > Kobe Bryant and Stephon Marbury

Mehmet Okur, Marc Jackson (26th in EFF per 48, is that "crap"?), Mike Sweetney, and Dikembe Mutombo > Antawn Jamison and Grant Hill

Mikki Moore > Kurt Thomas


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Given that Fortson, Gooden, Nazr, Sweetney, etc are high volume rebounders, it seems to go in line with what I said about guys with high rebound rates having high EFF per 48. Notice how nobody with a high assists per 48 is on the top 50?

I will take an assist over a rebound any day of the week. I'll take a 10 assist game over a 10 rebound game any day of the week. Rebounds are valued too highly in EFF.

Also, of course Nazr doesn't average lots of turnovers, he hardly has the ball in his hands. The moment he touches the ball he gets rid of it within two seconds (unless he is forced to pass, then its about 6 seconds). I'm sure his turnover rate is not good when you take into account how long he has the ball on each possession. If Marbury has the ball for 50% of our possessions and only averages 3 turnovers, should Nazr be having the ball for 5% of our possessions and averaging 1 turnover?

EFF also does not discriminate between the types of shots attempted, Jumpers are necessary because they spread the defense. You can't pound it inside every possession. Its well known that jumpers are lower percentage, which is another advantage big men have in EFF.

Further, basketballreference.com seems to agree with me. Part of their formula for thier Hall of Fame Monitor is...

75 points for each NBA MVP award 
15 points for each All NBA First Team selection 
1 point for each point of NBA career Approximate Value and .33 points for each point of ABA career Approximate Value 
*2.5 points for each point of NBA career Efficiency* 
3.5 points for each NBA Championship 
*-20 points for centers and -15 points for forwards *

"The slight bias towards centers and forwards that AV and EFF have needs to be acounted for with a penalty. Centers are penalized 20 points and forwards are penalized 15 points."

There are only 10 guards (thats SGs and PGs) on the top 50 for EFF per 48. 

Wade, Lebron (whos a SF this year), Nash, Francis, Pierce, Hughes, Ginobili, Kobe, Marbury, and Tinsley.

Man, what an accurate statistic.

Tracy McGrady btw, is noticeably absent from the top 50. Al Jefferson however, is. Antoine Walker? Also absent. But Raef LaFrentz sure did rank high. According to EFF per 48, Danny Ainge is a genius.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Rashidi, to be honest, I'm not sure what exactly your point is.

EFF does favor bigmen over guards, but not because it values rebounds more. It seems to weigh rebounds the same as, not more than assists. But the reason if favors bigmen is because it also takes FG% and turnovers into account, and centers typically do better in those regards than PGs for obvious reasons. However guards can make up for that to some extent thru steals and FT%.

And the reason that EFF/48 favors bigs more than regular EFF is that guards typically play more MPG. Of course it may be just as accurate, if not more so, to state it the other way: regular EFF advantages guards because they play more MPG than bigs.

But why are you trying to make this about Nazr vs Nash, or some other odd manuever? Even if he's ranked 12th in EFF/48 of Centers and PFs that is still 12th out of 60.

And if you really want to keep it apples to apples lets just look at centers. He's the 3rd highest center in EFF/48 behind Shaq and B. Miller, and 4th in reg EFF behind Shaq, Yao, and B. Miller.

As I said, "That's pretty good by any measure, but especially considering his slow start." 

So just what is your beef?


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*which i agree with.*

basically rashidi is saying you can't use stats to quantify how good a player is.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

*Re: which i agree with.*

Triple post.

BTW, am I the only one who constantly has trouble accessing the database on this board?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

*Re: which i agree with.*

double post


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

*Re: which i agree with.*



> Originally posted by <b>sherako</b>!
> basically rashidi is saying you can't use stats to quantify how good a player is.


No offense, but... are you nuts? 

You come by enough to know that Rashidi churns stats relentlessly in attempts to quantify and compare players. And his claim to fame is to quantify players (many he's never seen) for video games. In fact the brunt of his participation in this thread has been an attempt to quantify Nazr... downwardly... with stats.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> basically rashidi is saying you can't use stats to quantify how good a player is.


Surely you jest,or you are a newbie....without looking at Rashidis posts as i have him on IGNORE,i am sure he puts down Naz as he is a Zeke aquisition.And the fact that he was part of the KVH trade will only bias his judgement even more..

He is very predictable and uses stats ALL the time..except when they work against him


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

So nazr had EIGHT BLOCKS!! what a game. most improved player maybe?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PennyHardaway</b>!
> So nazr had EIGHT BLOCKS!! what a game. most improved player maybe?


Don't you just hear Rashidi rifling thru pages of stats determined to name a dozen guys more worthy? Brace yourself...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

LOL..8 blocks by the human eraser Naz!!!!!!!!!!

of course 9 of them came across that human red headed pogo stick,brian Scalabrene


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

guys that could get it: LeBron James, Amare Stoudemire

but i see Lebron winning mvp. i dont think theres been a time where someone won both. And i dont think Amare really improved, but the Suns offense is a run and gun team averaging 110 points, they get alot more possesions now. Also, Stoudemire has a point guard this year, last year he has eisley and barbosa.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> He is very predictable and uses stats ALL the time..except when they work against him


You mean except when they are faulty.

Is there anyone who disagrees with what I said, or are you just going to ***** and moan about it?



> regular EFF advantages guards because they play more MPG than bigs


No, EFF favors guards because EFF favors rebounds, which it counts equally with points and assists. Again, what would you rather have, a 10 assist game or a 10 rebound game? It actually counts rebounds MORE than points, because you lose points when you miss shots.

Power Forwards and centers in bold.

*1. Kevin Garnett 34.67 
2. Tim Duncan 29.14 
3. Dirk Nowitzki 28.17* 
4. LeBron James 27.90 
* 5. Amare Stoudemire 26.71 
6. Shawn Marion 26.48 *
7. Dwyane Wade 25.05 
8. Kobe Bryant 24.76 
* 9. Shaquille O'Neal 23.96 
10. Chris Webber 23.20 
11. Brad Miller 22.38 *
11. Steve Nash 22.38 
* 13. Elton Brand 22.20 *
14. Steve Francis 22.05 
* 15. Carlos Boozer 21.91
16. Zach Randolph 21.85 
17. Antawn Jamison 21.68 *
18. Paul Pierce 21.60 
19. Stephon Marbury 21.10 
* 20. Pau Gasol 20.80 *

Brad Miller is the perfect example. How many of you would take him over Marbury, Nash, Francis, Pierce, Ray Allen, Tracy McGrady, etc. Would you take Amare over Kobe?

Nazr is a one-dimensional specialist, his one specialty being rebounding. Of course he looks good EFF wise. Nazr is 42nd in EFF. Dwight Howard (another rebounding specialist right now) is 44th. Meanwhile Kenyon Martin is 45th, Peja Stojakovic is 46th, and Michael Redd is 47th.

But what do I know, I'm just twisting these stats to favor my arguement. I never use common sense when determining what a stat is accurate or misleading on, especially when I look at that stats analytically for other purposes. Never ever.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

By the way, for whoever said Nazr is the most valuble player in the trade, according to EFF, Keith Van Horn (34th) is more valuable.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

but we were only comparing big men with big men with the efficiency per 48, so whats your point?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

This is getting redundant but I'll take one more swipe at it.



> No, EFF favors *bigs [sic]* because EFF favors rebounds, which it counts equally with points and assists. Again, what would you rather have, a 10 assist game or a 10 rebound game?It actually counts rebounds MORE than points, because you lose points when you miss shots.


Not sure I get that last sentence, but note that you are stating two things at once: that rebounds are counted equal to points, and also that they are counted more than points. Care to pick one and stick with it?

You are also stuck on this whole notion of rebounds when I already showed that FG%, FT%, Assts, steals, TOs, etc, also weigh equally. You seem to want to downplay that Nazr is not just rebounding but also scoring on good shooting percentages, and good on steals and low turnovers.

As for which I'd prefer, rebounds or assists, I don't really know. I don't know exactly what constitutes an NBA assist. I'm pretty sure the recipient can put the ball on the floor before his shot, so many assists are somewhat phantom, as the actual bucket may be due more to the creativity/dominance of the recipient than the deliverer.

With better scorers around him Steph could have more assists, but would that in and of itself make him a better PG? Should an assist to Shaq count as much as an assist to Nazr? My point is these assists might not be as holy and pure as you make them out to be. On the other hand, Nazr does get a lot of rebs next to a good rebounding PF. Do you give that any weight?

Clearly these formulae are not perfect, they are just a good quick look at someone's overall influence on the court. EFF/48 is probably the best SINGLE stat to look at, but that doesn't make it perfect.

Now here's a justification for why it's okay to weigh rebounds up there with assists, blocks, TOs, and all the other components of the EFF formula. Often a rebound represents a possible change of possession, and since a change of possession has two components (offensive and defensive). As such it can represent the difference between two three point shots, or a 6 point swing. For instance, if NM pulls down an offensive board and maintains possession and that turns into a 3 point play that rebound is rudimentary to those points. At the same time it disallowed the other team to pull the board and possibly convert their own 3pt play. So each rebound/maintained possession can have a drastic impact in the game at least equal to a turnover, or a point, or an assist.

Now as I stated before, a good bigman will have an advantage in the EFF formula over guards because of their better FG% and lower turnovers, but it should also be noted that most bigmen - particularly one like Nazr, who has almost NO plays run for him - is severely disadvantaged by lack of time with the ball in his hands. Compare Nazr to some of those guards above him and note his shot attempts and plays run relative to them.



> Power Forwards and centers in bold.
> 
> *1. Kevin Garnett 34.67
> 2. Tim Duncan 29.14
> ...


I see your folly now. You are arguing this issue as though I were saying since Nazr had the 12th best EFF/48 in the league he were the 12th best player, or 12th most valuable player. Don't get complicated and ridiculous. In fact, I said to make things simple he should be compared to others who play his position, and he measures remarkably well against them. Make of that what you will, but don't ignore it and compare him to guards.



> Nazr is a one-dimensional specialist, his one specialty being rebounding.


Again, you're downplaying his points, steals, FG%, low turnovers, and other EFF components. Why?



> Of course he looks good EFF wise. Nazr is 42nd in EFF. Dwight Howard (another rebounding specialist right now) is 44th. Meanwhile Kenyon Martin is 45th, Peja Stojakovic is 46th, and Michael Redd is 47th.


If there is a point I'd love to hear it.



> But what do I know, I'm just twisting these stats to favor my arguement. I never use common sense when determining what a stat is accurate or misleading on, especially when I look at that stats analytically for other purposes. Never ever.


Who knows what you do in "never ever" land, but your motives here to downplay anything Isiah oriented is pretty transparent and predictable, and dwarfs any otherwise intelligent interpretation of stats.


----------

