Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Ballhogs

Expand Messages
  • McKibbin, Stuart
    I m curious if there could be some statistical definition of what a ballhog is. Some level of shots per assists, or shots per possesion. What would be the
    Message 1 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm curious if there could be some statistical definition of what a ballhog is. Some level of shots per assists, or shots per possesion. What would be the benchmarks? What would be the ratios of a "team player"? I'd imagine the ratios would vary by position.
       
      The reason I'm asking is that Paul Pierce is being called a selfish ballhog for his play in Indianapolis. But I look at his stats www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html and I see he was two assists away from leading the team for the tourney and he led the team in assists in four games.
       
      Another way to ask the question would be: Are assists a reliable measure of "team player"?
    • Michael K. Tamada
      ... Maybe a better index would be some measure of percent of offensive touches , possibly ameliorated somewhat by assists. That is, there s the stereotypical
      Message 2 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, McKibbin, Stuart wrote:

        > I'm curious if there could be some statistical definition of what a ballhog
        > is. Some level of shots per assists, or shots per possesion. What would be
        > the benchmarks? What would be the ratios of a "team player"? I'd imagine the
        > ratios would vary by position.
        >
        > The reason I'm asking is that Paul Pierce is being called a selfish ballhog
        > for his play in Indianapolis. But I look at his stats
        > www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html
        > <http://www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html> and I see he
        > was two assists away from leading the team for the tourney and he led the
        > team in assists in four games.
        >
        > Another way to ask the question would be: Are assists a reliable measure of
        > "team player"?

        Maybe a better index would be some measure of "percent of offensive
        touches", possibly ameliorated somewhat by assists.

        That is, there's the stereotypical "gunning ballhog" who does nothing but
        shoot. But for decades people have recognized that there is such as thing
        as the "selfish assist man" (Kevin Porter being the first prominent one
        that I know of). He was willing to pass; okay fine. But he *insisted* on
        passing, more specifically on being the passer and thus the guy who got
        the assist and the guy who led the league in assists.

        The bigger question though is what is the team's offensive strategy. Dale
        Ellis with the Sonics took a lot of shots and had very few assists. But
        that was his role. But if Jerome James started to do that, his teammates
        would start calling him a ballhog.

        Payton I'm sure dominates the Sonics in terms of percent of touches,
        albeit with a good number of assists. Again that is his role. Pierce
        may've had a lower percent of touches, and evidently had a good number of
        assists, with the US team but if that wasn't his role, that would explain
        the criticism.


        --MKT
      • Dean Oliver
        Shammond Williams has been called a ballhog. Kevin McHale. Others? My sense is that the term does come up when a player insists on making _something_ happen
        Message 3 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Shammond Williams has been called a ballhog. Kevin McHale. Others?

          My sense is that the term does come up when a player insists on
          making _something_ happen any time they get the ball. They ignore
          the possibility of making the next pass, being part of an offensive
          flow. But, as Mike suggests, a lot of players are supposed to be the
          end result of making the next pass.

          If we can identify subjectively players that were considered
          ballhogs, that might help. Antoine Walker? Iverson? Stackhouse?
          Steve Francis? Glenn Robinson? Jason Williams? Ron Mercer?

          I've got some ideas, but let's start naming some ballhogs and we'll
          see if things fit.

          --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, McKibbin, Stuart wrote:
          >
          > > I'm curious if there could be some statistical definition of what
          a ballhog
          > > is. Some level of shots per assists, or shots per possesion. What
          would be
          > > the benchmarks? What would be the ratios of a "team player"? I'd
          imagine the
          > > ratios would vary by position.
          > >
          > > The reason I'm asking is that Paul Pierce is being called a
          selfish ballhog
          > > for his play in Indianapolis. But I look at his stats
          > > www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html
          > > <http://www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html>
          and I see he
          > > was two assists away from leading the team for the tourney and he
          led the
          > > team in assists in four games.
          > >
          > > Another way to ask the question would be: Are assists a reliable
          measure of
          > > "team player"?
          >
          > Maybe a better index would be some measure of "percent of offensive
          > touches", possibly ameliorated somewhat by assists.
          >
          > That is, there's the stereotypical "gunning ballhog" who does
          nothing but
          > shoot. But for decades people have recognized that there is such
          as thing
          > as the "selfish assist man" (Kevin Porter being the first prominent
          one
          > that I know of). He was willing to pass; okay fine. But he
          *insisted* on
          > passing, more specifically on being the passer and thus the guy who
          got
          > the assist and the guy who led the league in assists.
          >
          > The bigger question though is what is the team's offensive
          strategy. Dale
          > Ellis with the Sonics took a lot of shots and had very few
          assists. But
          > that was his role. But if Jerome James started to do that, his
          teammates
          > would start calling him a ballhog.
          >
          > Payton I'm sure dominates the Sonics in terms of percent of touches,
          > albeit with a good number of assists. Again that is his role.
          Pierce
          > may've had a lower percent of touches, and evidently had a good
          number of
          > assists, with the US team but if that wasn't his role, that would
          explain
          > the criticism.
          >
          >
          > --MKT
        • Mike G
          ... a ballhog ... I think a ballhog is someone who only wants to determine the outcome of the possession, for better or worse. In other words, he would rather
          Message 4 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
            >
            > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, McKibbin, Stuart wrote:
            >
            > > I'm curious if there could be some statistical definition of what
            a ballhog
            > > is.

            I think a ballhog is someone who only wants to determine the outcome
            of the possession, for better or worse. In other words, he would
            rather take a bad shot than pass to someone in a better position.

            Quantitatively, we look at shooting percentages. Taking simple
            points/attempts, the US team had these percentages:

            Pierce --- .636
            R Miller - .581
            Brand ---- .579
            Finley --- .557
            Williams - .529
            A Miller - .519
            Marion --- .509
            Wallace -- .500
            O'Neal --- .496
            B Davis -- .493
            LaFrentz - .492
            A Davis -- .482

            So, it is hard to imagine any scenario in which Pierce should have
            shot the ball any less. If he was squandering the shot clock, I
            doubt he would end up with the scintillating shooting percent.

            Scoring 20 points while playing 24 minutes is very good. Factoring
            in the shooting percentages (as I am wont to do), I get
            these 'effective scoring rates' from our guys:

            Pierce - 40.1
            Finley - 22.1
            A Miller 18.7
            Marion - 17.7
            Brand -- 17.3
            Williams 17.0
            LaFrentz 14.9
            R Miller 14.0
            B Davis- 13.5
            O'Neal - 13.3
            A Davis- 11.0
            Wallace - 9.7

            To perhaps second-guess the coaching, here are the players' total
            effective rates, and their minutes played:

            Min player sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk - Total
            25 Finley- 22.1 3.7 3.6 1.0 (1.9) 0.1 - 29.9
            24 Pierce- 40.1 5.9 5.3 1.6 (2.7) 0.9 - 53.3
            22 AMiller 18.7 4.1 5.9 1.8 (1.7) 0.2 - 31.0
            22 Wallace `9.7 9.3 1.0 2.0 (1.2) 2.5 - 24.9
            21 B Davis 13.5 2.5 6.0 2.4 (3.1) 0.5 - 24.1
            21 Marion- 17.7 6.6 2.8 1.8 (0.8) 0.5 - 29.8
            19 JO'Neal 13.3 6.7 2.0 1.2 (1.6) 2.9 - 26.6
            18 A Davis 11.0 7.7 2.0 0.2 (0.8) 0.6 - 21.6
            17 RMiller 14.0 2.2 1.4 0.3 (1.5) 0.0 - 16.9
            16 Brand - 17.3 7.2 2.5 1.4 (1.2) 1.2 - 30.0
            11 LFrentz 14.9 7.1 0.4 0.9 (2.2) 1.3 - 23.2
            07 Will'ms 17.0 3.4 5.6 3.2 (3.2) 0.0 - 27.8

            Reggie obviously didn't need this. Jay Williams looks like a
            baller. No one did enough rebounding. Pierce's numbers look like
            Mr. Jordan's at his best. Not many assists from any one person,
            might make someone call someone a ballhog.

            Who called Pierce a selfish ballhog?




            Some level of shots per assists, or shots per possesion. What would be
            > > the benchmarks? What would be the ratios of a "team player"? I'd
            imagine the
            > > ratios would vary by position.
            > >
            > > The reason I'm asking is that Paul Pierce is being called a
            selfish ballhog
            > > for his play in Indianapolis. But I look at his stats
            > > www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html
            > > <http://www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html>
            and I see he
            > > was two assists away from leading the team for the tourney and he
            led the
            > > team in assists in four games.
            > >
            > > Another way to ask the question would be: Are assists a reliable
            measure of
            > > "team player"?
            >
            > Maybe a better index would be some measure of "percent of offensive
            > touches", possibly ameliorated somewhat by assists.
            >
            > That is, there's the stereotypical "gunning ballhog" who does
            nothing but
            > shoot. But for decades people have recognized that there is such
            as thing
            > as the "selfish assist man" (Kevin Porter being the first prominent
            one
            > that I know of). He was willing to pass; okay fine. But he
            *insisted* on
            > passing, more specifically on being the passer and thus the guy who
            got
            > the assist and the guy who led the league in assists.
            >
            > The bigger question though is what is the team's offensive
            strategy. Dale
            > Ellis with the Sonics took a lot of shots and had very few
            assists. But
            > that was his role. But if Jerome James started to do that, his
            teammates
            > would start calling him a ballhog.
            >
            > Payton I'm sure dominates the Sonics in terms of percent of touches,
            > albeit with a good number of assists. Again that is his role.
            Pierce
            > may've had a lower percent of touches, and evidently had a good
            number of
            > assists, with the US team but if that wasn't his role, that would
            explain
            > the criticism.
            >
            >
            > --MKT
          • john wallace craven
            ... Dominique, of COURSE. Allen Iverson always gets called one, though I don t know how fair that is. Jerry Stackouse up until last year, JR Rider... ... Well,
            Message 5 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Dean Oliver wrote:

              >
              > Shammond Williams has been called a ballhog. Kevin McHale. Others?

              Dominique, of COURSE. Allen Iverson always gets called one, though I don't
              know how fair that is. Jerry Stackouse up until last year, JR Rider...

              >
              > My sense is that the term does come up when a player insists on
              > making _something_ happen any time they get the ball.

              Well, Shammond is called a ballhog because it seems like every other time
              he dribbles the ball upcourt he shoots a 3 or a 20-footer with 20 seconds
              left on the shot clock.

              > They ignore
              > the possibility of making the next pass, being part of an offensive
              > flow. But, as Mike suggests, a lot of players are supposed to be the
              > end result of making the next pass.
              >
              > If we can identify subjectively players that were considered
              > ballhogs, that might help. Antoine Walker? Iverson? Stackhouse?
              > Steve Francis? Glenn Robinson? Jason Williams? Ron Mercer?

              All those guys would fit my definition of the term. I'm not so sure J-Will
              is quite a ballhog anymore, but he certainly was earlier in his career.

              >
              > I've got some ideas, but let's start naming some ballhogs and we'll
              > see if things fit.

              Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf
              Dominique has to be THE ballhog... I mean, wasn't the guy nicknamed "The
              Black Hole"?
              Dale Ellis
              There should be a special place set aside for people like Charles Oakley,
              who can't shoot anymore but who think they still can... is that a ballhog
              or not?

              >
              > --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, McKibbin, Stuart wrote:
              > >
              > > > I'm curious if there could be some statistical definition of what
              > a ballhog
              > > > is. Some level of shots per assists, or shots per possesion. What
              > would be
              > > > the benchmarks? What would be the ratios of a "team player"? I'd
              > imagine the
              > > > ratios would vary by position.
              > > >
              > > > The reason I'm asking is that Paul Pierce is being called a
              > selfish ballhog
              > > > for his play in Indianapolis. But I look at his stats
              > > > www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html
              > > > <http://www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/02-mwc_cumstats.html>
              > and I see he
              > > > was two assists away from leading the team for the tourney and he
              > led the
              > > > team in assists in four games.
              > > >
              > > > Another way to ask the question would be: Are assists a reliable
              > measure of
              > > > "team player"?
              > >
              > > Maybe a better index would be some measure of "percent of offensive
              > > touches", possibly ameliorated somewhat by assists.
              > >
              > > That is, there's the stereotypical "gunning ballhog" who does
              > nothing but
              > > shoot. But for decades people have recognized that there is such
              > as thing
              > > as the "selfish assist man" (Kevin Porter being the first prominent
              > one
              > > that I know of). He was willing to pass; okay fine. But he
              > *insisted* on
              > > passing, more specifically on being the passer and thus the guy who
              > got
              > > the assist and the guy who led the league in assists.
              > >
              > > The bigger question though is what is the team's offensive
              > strategy. Dale
              > > Ellis with the Sonics took a lot of shots and had very few
              > assists. But
              > > that was his role. But if Jerome James started to do that, his
              > teammates
              > > would start calling him a ballhog.
              > >
              > > Payton I'm sure dominates the Sonics in terms of percent of touches,
              > > albeit with a good number of assists. Again that is his role.
              > Pierce
              > > may've had a lower percent of touches, and evidently had a good
              > number of
              > > assists, with the US team but if that wasn't his role, that would
              > explain
              > > the criticism.
              > >
              > >
              > > --MKT
              >
              >
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
            • Dean Oliver
              ... other time ... seconds ... His teammates didn t really like playing with him, I hear. ... offensive ... the ... J-Will ... career. Interesting because I
              Message 6 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In APBR_analysis@y..., john wallace craven <john1974@u...> wrote:
                > Well, Shammond is called a ballhog because it seems like every
                other time
                > he dribbles the ball upcourt he shoots a 3 or a 20-footer with 20
                seconds
                > left on the shot clock.
                >

                His teammates didn't really like playing with him, I hear.

                > > They ignore
                > > the possibility of making the next pass, being part of an
                offensive
                > > flow. But, as Mike suggests, a lot of players are supposed to be
                the
                > > end result of making the next pass.
                > >
                > > If we can identify subjectively players that were considered
                > > ballhogs, that might help. Antoine Walker? Iverson? Stackhouse?
                > > Steve Francis? Glenn Robinson? Jason Williams? Ron Mercer?
                >
                > All those guys would fit my definition of the term. I'm not so sure
                J-Will
                > is quite a ballhog anymore, but he certainly was earlier in his
                career.

                Interesting because I chose these guys based on a statistical
                procedure. Francis and Robinson only barely make the quals. Rider
                definitely makes it, too.

                And let's get something straight about Stackhouse -- despite all the
                praise for being less selfish last year, he still took more shots per
                48 minutes last year than he took in any other year of his career
                except 2001. So by being an incredible ballhog in 2001, he made
                himself look like Mother Teresa in 2002. Sheesh.

                Note that D. Wilkins doesn't make my statistical cut, at least not at
                his prime. The guy was just too good (producing about 115 points per
                100 possessions). Like Jordan, he didn't turn the ball over much,
                though he shot a lot. He didn't even use as many possessions as
                Jordan (only 33% at his peak, which was pretty average for MJ).
                Maybe the thought was that Jordan didn't have as much talent around
                him as Wilkins.

                >
                > >
                > > I've got some ideas, but let's start naming some ballhogs and
                we'll
                > > see if things fit.
                >
                > Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf

                He qualified in several years under my stat procedure.

                > Dominique has to be THE ballhog... I mean, wasn't the guy
                nicknamed "The
                > Black Hole"?

                I heard that about Kevin McHale and one other frontcourt player who
                I'm forgetting.

                Anyone else?

                DeanO
              • harlanzo
                The best definition of ballhog seems like it should be the guy who wants to determine the outcome of the possession. This of course varies by position. A
                Message 7 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  The best definition of ballhog seems like it should be the guy who
                  wants to determine the outcome of the possession. This of course
                  varies by position. A center is expected to be a ballhog if he can
                  score whereas a guard really should not shoot everytime he touches
                  the ball and seems open. I wonder if ratio of shot attempts to
                  assists would reveal a "hogness." Probably not because I think most
                  ball dominating hogs tend to get a decent amount of assists. Here is
                  a radom sampling of some hogs and players with "team first" reps and
                  how they compare in shots to assits ratio:


                  Hogs
                  PPG FGM/FGA ASSTS shots/assists ratio
                  Damon Stoudamire 95-96 19.0 481/1129 653 1.72/1
                  Reggie Theus 82-83 23.8 749/1567 484 3.24/1
                  Antoine Walker 01-02 22.1 661/1689 407 4.15/1
                  Dominique Wilkins 90-91 25.9 770/1640 265 6.19/1
                  Allen Iverson 00-01 31.1 762/1813 325 5.58/1
                  Patrick Ewing 90-91 26.6 845/1645 244 6.74/1
                  Stephon Marbury 00-01 23.9 563/1277 506 2.52/1
                  George Gervin 80-81 27.1 850/1729 260 6.65/1
                  Rex Chapman 89-90 17.5 377/924 132 7.00/1
                  Armen Gilliam 91-92 16.9 512/1001 118 8.48/1
                  Chuck Person 89-90 19.7 605/1242 230 5.40/1
                  Rick Barry 72-73 25.1 737/1630 399 4.09/1
                  Wilt Chamberlain 61-62 50.4 1597/3159 192 16.45/1

                  Team Guys

                  Maurice Cheeks 84-85 13.1 422/741 497 1.49/1
                  Jason Kidd 01-02 14.7 445/1138 808 1.41/1
                  Magic Johnson 89-90 22.3 546/1138 907 1.25/1
                  John Stockton 96-97 14.4 416/759 860 0.88/1
                  Jeff Hornacek 93-94 15.9 472/1004 419 2.13/1
                  Joe Dumars 91-92 19.9 587/1311 375 3.50/1
                  Scottie Pippen 95-96 19.4 563/1216 452 2.69/1
                  Michael Jordan 95-96 30.4 916/1850 352 5.26/1
                  Arvydas Sabonis 96-97 13.4 328/658 146 4.51/1
                  Bill Walton 76-77 18.6 491/930 245 3.80/1
                  Wilt Chamberlain 66-67 24.1 785/1150 630 1.83/1
                  Bill Bradley 69-70 14.5 413/897 268 3.35/1
                • Michael K. Tamada
                  ... Taking into account the differences by position is important, I think. [...] ... [...] ... Marbury and Stoudamire, and one might add Payton to this list,
                  Message 8 of 15 , Sep 11, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, harlanzo wrote:

                    > wants to determine the outcome of the possession. This of course
                    > varies by position. A center is expected to be a ballhog if he can

                    Taking into account the differences by position is important, I think.

                    [...]

                    > Hogs
                    > PPG FGM/FGA ASSTS shots/assists ratio
                    > Damon Stoudamire 95-96 19.0 481/1129 653 1.72/1
                    > Reggie Theus 82-83 23.8 749/1567 484 3.24/1
                    [...]
                    > Stephon Marbury 00-01 23.9 563/1277 506 2.52/1

                    Marbury and Stoudamire, and one might add Payton to this list, are
                    good examples of guys who get plenty of assists but could also
                    be called ballhogs. We can see however that their shots:assists
                    ratios are not up there with the other ballhogs. PG ballhogs are
                    going to look different from the other ballhogs.

                    I'd forgotten about Theus, that's a good call. Sort of an early Kobe:
                    highly talented, all-around offensive ability, but aggravated his coaches
                    no end with his decision-making.


                    --MKT
                  • Mike G
                    ... per ... This might be key to the definition. Was Dominique taking the most shots, despite having one of the lower shooting pcts on his team? Maybe :
                    Message 9 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Dean Oliver" <deano@r...> wrote:
                      >D. Wilkins doesn't make my statistical cut, at least not at
                      > his prime. The guy was just too good (producing about 115 points
                      per
                      > 100 possessions). Like Jordan, he didn't turn the ball over much,
                      > though he shot a lot. He didn't even use as many possessions as
                      > Jordan (only 33% at his peak, which was pretty average for MJ).
                      > Maybe the thought was that Jordan didn't have as much talent around
                      > him as Wilkins.
                      >

                      This might be key to the definition. Was Dominique taking the most
                      shots, despite having one of the lower shooting pcts on his team?
                      Maybe :

                      Listing Hawks' top 5 minutes guys, overall shooting pct, scoring rate:

                      1985
                      Nique --- .506 24.4
                      E Johnson .536 17.1
                      Rivers -- .547 15.7
                      Wittman - .545 11.6
                      Levingston.548 12.0

                      Here is a year when Nique had assumed leadership of the team, and
                      could certainly have been thinking of setting up his teammates more.

                      1989
                      Nique --- .520 24.4
                      Moses --- .564 21.2
                      Rivers -- .538 14.6
                      Theus --- .525 17.2
                      Levingston.553 11.5

                      While the intervening years weren't so one-sided, the pattern
                      continued.

                      1993
                      Nique --- .559 29.3
                      Willis -- .524 17.0
                      Blaylock- .510 12.5
                      Augmon -- .540 16.0
                      Koncak -- .471 `3.9

                      In this 4-year interval, Nique's shooting pct rose steadily, while
                      his scoring help faded. (Following year, traded for Manning).

                      By one definition, the player with the best scoring efficiency should
                      really shoot more (not less), and thus cannot be considered a ballhog.

                      So Dominique Wilkins evolved from being truly a hog, to somewhat of a
                      hog, to being just a great offensive player.

                      Another possible consideration is Wilkins' very-bad playoff rating.
                      If reputations are earned in the postseason, perhaps I should be
                      looking there.


                      > > the guy
                      > nicknamed "The
                      > > Black Hole"?
                      >
                      > I heard that about Kevin McHale and one other frontcourt player who
                      > I'm forgetting.

                      Black Hole was Elvin Hayes, I think.

                      McHale would be another 'too good to be a ballhog'.
                    • Mike G
                      Here are Dominique Wilkins and teammates numbers in years they got out of the first round. Adding assist rate to this list. 1986 (9 games) player -- pct.
                      Message 10 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Here are Dominique Wilkins' and teammates' numbers in years they got
                        out of the first round. Adding assist rate to this list.

                        1986 (9 games)
                        player -- pct. sco. ast.
                        Wilkins - .501 22.7 2.4
                        Wittman - .541 15.6 2.9
                        Willis -- .571 15.2 0.6
                        Rivers -- .504 12.9 9.3
                        Rollins - .562 `7.7 0.4

                        1987 (8 G)
                        Wilkins - .488 23.7 2.6
                        Willis -- .540 15.5 0.6
                        Wittman - .571 19.6 3.6
                        Rivers -- .425 `7.3 13.1
                        Rollins - .571 `6.6 0.5

                        At least Rivers knows to pass, when he isn't hitting.

                        1988 (12 G)
                        Wilkins -- .525 29.1 2.7
                        Rivers --- .515 15.2 10.1
                        Wittman -- .495 10.8 4.2
                        Willis --- .538 14.2 0.4
                        Levingston .596 14.2 1.1

                        Gee, I guess that's it. Then 3 years of 1st-round exits, and 2 with
                        no playoffs. So Nique's best years weren't great years for the Hawks.

                        It does look like Nique rather shot his team out of the playoffs some
                        years. Their EC Finals appearance in 1988 was their peak, and I
                        don't think it was anything but a great performance by D. Wilkins.
                        (Culminating in classic shootout with Larry Bird).
                      • Michael K. Tamada
                        On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Mike G wrote: [...] ... [...] ... Two seasons where Wilkins had the LOWEST shooting percentage, and HIGHEST points scored (and ipso facto
                        Message 11 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Mike G wrote:

                          [...]

                          > 1985
                          > Nique --- .506 24.4

                          [...]

                          > 1989
                          > Nique --- .520 24.4

                          Two seasons where Wilkins had the LOWEST shooting percentage, and HIGHEST
                          points scored (and ipso facto highest shot attempts) of the top 5
                          teammates. That might be getting close to the definition of a ballhog
                          right there.

                          > 1993
                          > Nique --- .559 29.3

                          > In this 4-year interval, Nique's shooting pct rose steadily, while
                          > his scoring help faded. (Following year, traded for Manning).
                          >
                          > By one definition, the player with the best scoring efficiency should
                          > really shoot more (not less), and thus cannot be considered a ballhog.
                          >
                          > So Dominique Wilkins evolved from being truly a hog, to somewhat of a
                          > hog, to being just a great offensive player.

                          Yes. I hadn't realized that there'd been that improvement in Wilkins'
                          numbers, thanks. Although those earlier career numbers make him appear
                          even worse of a gunner than I'd been thinking.

                          > Another possible consideration is Wilkins' very-bad playoff rating.
                          > If reputations are earned in the postseason, perhaps I should be
                          > looking there.

                          Those were also interesting and confirmatory of our ballhog memories of
                          'Nique.



                          --MKT
                        • john wallace craven
                          ... One small point in defense of Nique: Theoretically, a low-percentage shooter can take the most shots on his team and still be helpful to them. Think of
                          Message 12 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Michael K. Tamada wrote:

                            >
                            >
                            > On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Mike G wrote:
                            >
                            > [...]
                            >
                            > > 1985
                            > > Nique --- .506 24.4
                            >
                            > [...]
                            >
                            > > 1989
                            > > Nique --- .520 24.4
                            >
                            > Two seasons where Wilkins had the LOWEST shooting percentage, and HIGHEST
                            > points scored (and ipso facto highest shot attempts) of the top 5
                            > teammates. That might be getting close to the definition of a ballhog
                            > right there.

                            One small point in defense of 'Nique: Theoretically, a low-percentage
                            shooter can take the most shots on his team and still be helpful to them.
                            Think of Iverson on the 76ers a couple years ago. They had nobody on the
                            team who could be counted on to create their own shot with 4 seconds left
                            on the shot clock other than Allen; the fact that he took all those shots
                            does not necessarily make him a ballhog (of course, they don't make him
                            _not_ a ballhog either). Reggie Miller is another guy who might make a
                            list like this unfairly because he as well is counted on to put something
                            up when the clock is running down for his team.

                            That being said, 'Nique had guys like Kevin Willis with him in his prime
                            who could find ways to get shots off, and he _still_ refused to give the
                            ball up more often than not.

                            >
                            > > 1993
                            > > Nique --- .559 29.3
                            >
                            > > In this 4-year interval, Nique's shooting pct rose steadily, while
                            > > his scoring help faded. (Following year, traded for Manning).
                            > >
                            > > By one definition, the player with the best scoring efficiency should
                            > > really shoot more (not less), and thus cannot be considered a ballhog.
                            > >
                            > > So Dominique Wilkins evolved from being truly a hog, to somewhat of a
                            > > hog, to being just a great offensive player.
                            >
                            > Yes. I hadn't realized that there'd been that improvement in Wilkins'
                            > numbers, thanks. Although those earlier career numbers make him appear
                            > even worse of a gunner than I'd been thinking.
                            >
                            > > Another possible consideration is Wilkins' very-bad playoff rating.
                            > > If reputations are earned in the postseason, perhaps I should be
                            > > looking there.
                            >
                            > Those were also interesting and confirmatory of our ballhog memories of
                            > 'Nique.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > --MKT
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            > APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            >
                            >
                            >
                          • harlanzo
                            ... percentage ... them. ... True, does anyone have any sort of stastical data breaking donw a player s shooting % based on distance? (ie from the inside the
                            Message 13 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In APBR_analysis@y..., john wallace craven <john1974@u...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              >>
                              > One small point in defense of 'Nique: Theoretically, a low-
                              percentage
                              > shooter can take the most shots on his team and still be helpful to
                              them.
                              > Think of Iverson on the 76ers a couple years ago.


                              True, does anyone have any sort of stastical data breaking donw a
                              player's shooting % based on distance? (ie from the inside the paint
                              from 15-20 ft, and then 3 point shots). This might give insight into
                              whether the % nique or Stackhouse shot is acceptable or truly
                              chucking. With Iverson I'd venture that his 40% from 18-25 feet on
                              his 25 shots a game would come up better than giving half his shots
                              to the likes of george lynch and ty hill from 12-18 feet.
                            • John Hollinger
                              A few more hogs, or guys with hog reps, to look at: --World B. Free --Chuck Person --Tom Chambers --Lamond Murray --Trevor Ruffin - an obscure player, but I
                              Message 14 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                A few more hogs, or guys with hog reps, to look at:

                                --World B. Free
                                --Chuck Person
                                --Tom Chambers
                                --Lamond Murray
                                --Trevor Ruffin - an obscure player, but I suspect he will blow
                                nearly everybody else off the charts

                                Somebody mentioned Reggie Miller before, but he's the anti-hog. He
                                get as many points from as few shots as anyone who has played the
                                game.
                              • Michael K. Tamada
                                ... Has anyone mentioned Freeman Williams yet? My guess is he d make World B Free look shy. ... I think he was mentioned in the Alan Iverson context, as the
                                Message 15 of 15 , Sep 12, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, John Hollinger wrote:

                                  > A few more hogs, or guys with hog reps, to look at:
                                  >
                                  > --World B. Free
                                  > --Chuck Person
                                  > --Tom Chambers
                                  > --Lamond Murray
                                  > --Trevor Ruffin - an obscure player, but I suspect he will blow
                                  > nearly everybody else off the charts

                                  Has anyone mentioned Freeman Williams yet? My guess is he'd make World B
                                  Free look shy.

                                  > Somebody mentioned Reggie Miller before, but he's the anti-hog. He
                                  > get as many points from as few shots as anyone who has played the
                                  > game.

                                  I think he was mentioned in the Alan Iverson context, as the "necessary
                                  ball-dominator" as opposed to "ball hog" -- i.e. he had to be the guy who
                                  shot a lot, including bad shots, because no one else on his team could be
                                  relied upon to make the offense go.

                                  Two differences between Miller and Iverson though: Miller must surely
                                  have vastly better shooting percentage and efficiency stats than Iverson
                                  (which is what you allude to above); and Miller often had better-scoring
                                  teammates (Smits, Person, etc.) than Iverson.

                                  And of course Iverson shoots and scores more than Miller does. But as
                                  John Craven pointed out, Iverson can be considered to be a "necessary ball
                                  dominator" -- the 76ers go nowhere unless they put the ball in his hands
                                  and have him shoot.

                                  Miller on the other hand never dominated the Pacers' offense the way
                                  Iverson does the 76ers'. He didn't have Iverson's ball-hoggedly low FG%,
                                  but he also didn't have to be the guy shooting 30 times a game.


                                  --MKT
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.