James Harden TRADED to Rockets

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by hobojoe

R-Star, you're also harping on this 43% shooting figure. We're still just halfway through the season, the 43% figure was just under 47% a week ago before this shooting slump. It'll happen over the course of the season as the number one option. He's been reasonably efficient, obviously not as efficient as the 3rd option sixth man as you said would happen, but he's not exactly Iversoning it out there every night.

Slumps happen though. He went through a hot streak, and then slumped. Which would lead to believe what his shooting percentage is at now will be around his average.

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by TucsonClip

I just dont understand, for the life of me, how someone can argue that FG% is more relevant than TS%.

You can argue PER all you want, I have no problem with that. However, TS% and other advanced stats like reb%, ast%, ect are pure mathematics that make perfect sense. Again, you are arguing TS% for arguments sake to support your opinions.

Show me a math book that shows how X shot on a basketball court is better than shot Y, and how percentages should be skewed to relate to that.

I'm arguing TS% because I don't agree with it. If you shoot a 43 FG% from the field, then you shoot 43% from the field. It doesn't matter to me where you shoot it from.


Obviously many disagree on that though and I'm in the minority here.

[Diable]

Originally Posted by R-Star

Hey look, its Diable popping into the thread to say "Yea good point! Me too!" then disappearing.


Talk about how Harden was better than Kobe last year. Or how Harden is such an amazing passer and defender.....

Count up the games Kobe has won for his team this year. Count up the games Harden has won for his. Is Kobe really helping his team more than Harden is? If so, then where is the evidence of it. I don't see it in the win loss record. I don't think Kobe is without help, he has plenty of scapegoats and plenty of losses as well.

If you're going to claim that Harden is barely good enough to lead his team to the 8th seed, then you better think about that when you go on the rag about him and Kobe.

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by Diable

Count up the games Kobe has won for his team this year. Count up the games Harden has won for his. Is Kobe really helping his team more than Harden is? If so, then where is the evidence of it. I don't see it in the win loss record. I don't think Kobe is without help, he has plenty of scapegoats and plenty of losses as well.

If you're going to claim that Harden is barely good enough to lead his team to the 8th seed, then you better think about that when you go on the rag about him and Kobe.

I'm sorry, but wasn't the argument about last year, and not this year?

You said last year that Harden was clearly already better than Kobe, did you not?

The only thing I've said about Harden is I don't see him as a franchise guy, and that I think he's a ball hog. Only one of those can be said about Kobe.

[RollWithEm]

Originally Posted by R-Star

If you shoot a 43 FG% from the field, then you shoot 43% from the field. It doesn't matter to me where you shoot it from.

Very wrong. 43% on 100 attempts from 18 feet is worth 43 points less than 43% on 100 attempts from 23 feet.

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

Very wrong. 43% on 100 attempts from 18 feet is worth 43 points less than 43% on 100 attempts from 23 feet.

We're comparing FG%, not FG% and 3pt%


Not to mention the guy playing 18 feet and in will get a ton more foul shots on that 43%.

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by R-Star

If you shoot a 43 FG% from the field, then you shoot 43% from the field. It doesn't matter to me where you shoot it from.

dude you're usually ok in my book but this really is a dumb thing to say

if I take 100 shots from inside the arc and make 43% I get 86 points for my effort, if I do the same outside the arc I get 129 points - that's pretty black and white

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by R-Star

We're comparing FG%, not FG% and 3pt%


Not to mention the guy playing 18 feet and in will get a ton more foul shots on that 43%.

3p% is part of fg% - 3p% is just a subset but fg% is figured as a total of all shots attempted including treys

and there's no reason why someone is going to get more fouled at 18' than at 23' and even so the difference in made FTAs would have to be 'Dwyane Wade in games 5 and 6 of the finals in 2006' to offset the extra points from made threes

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by e-monk

3p% is part of fg% - 3p% is just a subset but fg% is figured as a total of all shots attempted including treys

and there's no reason why someone is going to get more fouled at 18' than at 23' and even so the difference in made FTAs would have to be 'Dwyane Wade in games 5 and 6 of the finals in 2006' to offset the extra points from made threes

Jesus.......

I understand 3pt% is part of FG%, that's why I judge purely by FG%.

You get fouled way more the closer you move to the paint. And trying to use 100 shots per game is asinine. The top 3 point shooters in this league make 3 3 point shots a game. So for a slasher to make up for that, he'd have to get to the line 2 times. Twice. Think about that for a second. And that's under the assumption the 3 point shooter is even shooting at the same percentage as the guy taking his shots closer to the paint, which of course odds say he's not going to.

[TucsonClip]

Originally Posted by R-Star

Show me a math book that shows how X shot on a basketball court is better than shot Y, and how percentages should be skewed to relate to that.

I'm arguing TS% because I don't agree with it. If you shoot a 43 FG% from the field, then you shoot 43% from the field. It doesn't matter to me where you shoot it from.


Obviously many disagree on that though and I'm in the minority here.

What? That post makes absolutely no sense! This is what im talking about. Its one thing if you dont understand what TS% is. its another to make a comment like that. Its simple math. 3s are worth more than 2s. Free throws are easier than nearly all shots outside 5ft.

I understand what you are saying, but 43% from the field is NOT equal to just shooting jumpers or scoring at the rim. You take 100 shots from 3 and hit 43% and you score more points than if you did by making 43/100 from 2. Again, simple math. I dont think you need a math book for that.

[TucsonClip]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

Very wrong. 43% on 100 attempts from 18 feet is worth 43 points less than 43% on 100 attempts from 23 feet.

Exactly. I dont understand why this is such a difficult concept to comprehend...

[TucsonClip]

Originally Posted by R-Star

Jesus.......

I understand 3pt% is part of FG%, that's why I judge purely by FG%.

You get fouled way more the closer you move to the paint. And trying to use 100 shots per game is asinine. The top 3 point shooters in this league make 3 3 point shots a game. So for a slasher to make up for that, he'd have to get to the line 2 times. Twice. Think about that for a second. And that's under the assumption the 3 point shooter is even shooting at the same percentage as the guy taking his shots closer to the paint, which of course odds say he's not going to.

Again, arguing just for arguments sake. You are really tying to make this difficult, because you want to be stubborn about this.

Nobody is saying anyone is taking 100 3s per game. Again, THAT is simple math. you do realize that a lot of stats are based out of 100 in order to build a rational ratio/percentage?

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by TucsonClip

What? That post makes absolutely no sense! This is what im talking about. Its one thing if you dont understand what TS% is. its another to make a comment like that. Its simple math. 3s are worth more than 2s. Free throws are easier than nearly all shots outside 5ft.

I understand what you are saying, but 43% from the field is NOT equal to just shooting jumpers or scoring at the rim. You take 100 shots from 3 and hit 43% and you score more points than if you did by making 43/100 from 2. Again, simple math. I dont think you need a math book for that.

So? How does that have anything to do with who efficient someone scores?

Free throws are easy so they don't really count anymore? Because TS% is math?


No. I've always laughed when people try to math up sports. You can do percentages, you can do probability, but in reality you can't calculate a game like basketball. Shooters get hot, shooters get cold, players have break out years, or their games fall off, etc. There's no mathematical equation for luck. There's no mathematical equation for playing in an easier division. There's no mathematical equation for getting guarded by Lance Stephenson, instead of getting locked down by Paul George.


FG% is what I judge a players scoring ability on. If a guy scores 20 in a game on 46% and goes to the line a lot because he drives, I value that over a guy who shoots 43% on those 20 points, but shoots a lot from outside.

You guys keep talking over and over about how amazing 3 pointers are, and I mentioned the top 3 point shooters in the league make 3 a game. Which would be 3 more points for a slasher to make at the line. Not tough.

[RollWithEm]

Originally Posted by R-Star

You guys keep talking over and over about how amazing 3 pointers are, and I mentioned the top 3 point shooters in the league make 3 a game. Which would be 3 more points for a slasher to make at the line. Not tough.

Who is saying this? Where are you reading these people talking about how amazing 3-pointers are? Are you reading a thread on another message board in between visits to this thread?

It's simple math.

James Harden shoots 43% from the field with 17.8 FGA each game and averages 25.9 PPG. Kyrie Irving shoots 47% from the field with 18.6 FGA each game and averages 23.7 PPG. Wait what? Irving shoots more and shoots a better percentage but averages less points? How can this be in R-Star world? Isn't Irving the more efficient scorer because his FG% is higher? If so, how could he possibly score less with more attempts???

Oh wait... Harden gets to the line more often and shoots a better percentage once he gets there... therefore he has a better TS%. Oh look! It has virtually nothing to do with who shoots more threes because TS% is about much more than just threes. The more efficient scorer scores more with less attempts. Plain and simple.

[R-Star]

Originally Posted by RollWithEm

Who is saying this? Where are you reading these people talking about how amazing 3-pointers are? Are you reading a thread on another message board in between visits to this thread?

It's simple math.

James Harden shoots 43% from the field with 17.8 FGA each game and averages 25.9 PPG. Kyrie Irving shoots 47% from the field with 18.6 FGA each game and averages 23.7 PPG. Wait what? Irving shoots more and shoots a better percentage but averages less points? How can this be in R-Star world? Isn't Irving the more efficient scorer because his FG% is higher? If so, how could he possibly score less with more attempts???

Oh wait... Harden gets to the line more often and shoots a better percentage once he gets there... therefore he has a better TS%. Oh look! It has virtually nothing to do with who shoots more threes because TS% is about much more than just threes. The more efficient scorer scores more with less attempts. Plain and simple.

Its actually the fact that Harden gets to the line 5 more times a game, if you'd like to look. Which in fact would mean Harden scores at a worse rate, but gets more points at the line.