- There was some notice in the media when they went 4-1 or 6-1 or whatever it was after the trade, but they ve cooled down since then, playing decent but notMessage 1 of 34 , Apr 1, 2003View SourceThere was some notice in the media when they went 4-1 or 6-1 or whatever it was
after the trade, but they've cooled down since then, playing decent but not
great or at any rate not consistent ball.
So resurgence might be too strong a word, but it is nice to see them doing some
good things, such as kicking the Lakers all over the floor of the Key Arena.
What I haven't seen any mention of in this group, and just a few cryptic articles
in the media: what's up with Forte? Some articles said he was constantly
critical of, and not getting on with, the team and the players and so he was
suspended basically for insubordination and being a team cancer.
From: monepeterson [mailto:mone@...]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 1:08 PM
Subject: [APBR_analysis] Seattle Resurgence?
Something I'm not hearing about a lot in the national media is
Seattle's resurgence. They were left for dead at the time of the
Payton-Allen trade, but since Allen has been in the lineup the team is
12-7 and now only 2.5 games out of a playoff spot.
I know it's a small sample size, but what's changed? What are they
doing better now?
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- ... This is actually misleading. I won t say wrong, but misleading. Pace is very important. Many of the individual stats are offensive and without adjustmentMessage 34 of 34 , Apr 11, 2003View Source--- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
> What matters is that x points and y rebounds occurred in z minutes.This is actually misleading. I won't say wrong, but misleading.
Pace is very important. Many of the individual stats are offensive
and without adjustment for pace overweight players who just put up a
lot of offensive stats _per minute_. And pace is mostly (not
entirely) a function of a decision about pace, not ability (though
ability has a small impact). How fast or slow teams play reflects
primarily on their style not their substance. How many points and
rebounds per minute reflects both style and substance. Removing pace
more isolates the substance.
The way common possessions do it is by isolating another variable in
addition to minutes that is common between both teams on the floor.
Both teams have 48 minutes to win. Both teams have 100 possessions
to win in a fast game or 85 in a slow game or whatever. But both
opponents have the same number (not true with small possessions
= "plays"). So, yes, what matters is what happens per minute, but it
is equivalent to say that what matters is what happens per
possession. And what happens per possession isolates quality better
than what happens per minute.