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

Fwd: Re: [APBR] Re: How did Yao not get Rookie Award yet was top rook in All NBA team voting?

Expand Messages
  • aaronkoo
    And here s another one to study. What is consistency? And was Amare more consistent (presumably consistently good)? ... Maybe it s just me, but Amare was
    Message 1 of 3 , May 8, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      And here's another one to study. What is consistency? And was Amare
      more consistent (presumably consistently good)?

      --- In APBR@yahoogroups.com, Jim Hekel <jhekellakers@y...> wrote:
      Maybe it's just me, but Amare was much more consistent than Yao was.
      And yes, without Amare, the Suns are not a playoff team. jim in iowa

      Mike G <msg_53@h...> wrote:--- In
      APBR@yahoogroups.com, "monepeterson" <monepeterson@y...> wrote:
      > > The answer is that the All-NBA team is voted on by position,
      while
      >
      >
      > > Rookie of the Year does not consider position.

      I had Yao picked as rookie of the year, by a pretty wide margin.

      Per-game averages for the top 2 players were startlingly close:
      player sco reb ast stl (TO) blk
      Amare 13.5 8.8 1.0 .8 (2.3) 1.1
      Yao M 13.5 8.2 1.7 .4 (2.1) 1.8

      Now, consider that Amare played 2.4 more minutes per game to get
      these averages; he shot 25 more FGA and 113 more FTA to get the same
      points.


      In standardized rates (adjusting for minutes AND team paces) they
      look like this (per-36-minute):

      Amare .528 16.3 10.3 1.1 .9 (2.6) 1.2 - 28.2
      Yao M .568 18.3 10.8 2.2 .5 (2.6) 2.2 - 33.2

      Still similar contributions, but Yao takes Amare across the board
      (excepting steals).

      Is this another team-based award? Amare got his team to the
      playoffs; Yao did not.

      I also thought Rocket Steve Francis was just a little better than
      Steve Nash, but Nash was 3rd-team All-NBA.


      > They didn't consider position very much for the All-NBA vote,
      either,
      > listing Paul Pierce as a forward instead of a guard (which is what
      > he's been playing most of the year) and Jermaine O'Neal as a center.

      Putting the better players on the All-NBA, and then assigning them
      positions, doesn't bother me. If they were short on forwards, what
      kept Karl Malone off the list? Not as good as he once was?
      Unpopular? (He was also the most glaring omission from the allstar
      teams)

      If a younger player gets 23-9-5, he gets consideration, at least.
      Those numbers aren't good by Malone's career standards; but they're
      pretty good by 40-year-old standards.


      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      ===***This has been an APBR Mail List message***===

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      ---------------------------------
      Do you Yahoo!?
      The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
      --- End forwarded message ---
    • nik
      ... All of the above make sense. Also... Amare came out of nowhere (in some people s opinion) and impressed, while Yao underachieved, compared to some
      Message 2 of 3 , May 9, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- aaronkoo <deano@...> wrote:
        > And here's another one to study. What is
        > consistency? And was Amare
        > more consistent (presumably consistently good)?
        >
        > --- In APBR@yahoogroups.com, Jim Hekel
        > <jhekellakers@y...> wrote:
        > Maybe it's just me, but Amare was much more
        > consistent than Yao was.
        > And yes, without Amare, the Suns are not a playoff
        > team. jim in iowa
        >
        > Mike G <msg_53@h...> wrote:--- In

        .......

        >
        > I had Yao picked as rookie of the year, by a pretty
        > wide margin.
        >
        > Per-game averages for the top 2 players were
        > startlingly close:
        > player sco reb ast stl (TO) blk
        > Amare 13.5 8.8 1.0 .8 (2.3) 1.1
        > Yao M 13.5 8.2 1.7 .4 (2.1) 1.8
        >
        > Now, consider that Amare played 2.4 more minutes per
        > game to get
        > these averages; he shot 25 more FGA and 113 more FTA
        > to get the same
        > points.
        >
        >
        > In standardized rates (adjusting for minutes AND
        > team paces) they
        > look like this (per-36-minute):
        >
        > Amare .528 16.3 10.3 1.1 .9 (2.6) 1.2 - 28.2
        > Yao M .568 18.3 10.8 2.2 .5 (2.6) 2.2 - 33.2
        >
        > Still similar contributions, but Yao takes Amare
        > across the board
        > (excepting steals).
        >
        > Is this another team-based award? Amare got his
        > team to the
        > playoffs; Yao did not.
        >
        > I also thought Rocket Steve Francis was just a
        > little better than
        > Steve Nash, but Nash was 3rd-team All-NBA.
        >
        >

        All of the above make sense. Also...
        Amare came "out of nowhere" (in some people's
        opinion) and impressed, while Yao underachieved,
        compared to some people's inflated expctations.

        Kirilenko's case is similar. Many ppl thnk that
        he deserved the 6th man award. But Bobby Jackson
        won it and he's not a bad choice (just like Amare
        isn't either). IMVHO this tends to show that the
        strongest factor is team success. Also, that people
        care basically just about the per game averages,
        not per/36min and formulas results.
        Could politics/increased patriotism have something
        to do with it as well?

        We can only speculate anyway. No way to get into
        voters' minds.

        -Nik

        __________________________________
        Do you Yahoo!?
        The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
        http://search.yahoo.com
      • aaronkoo
        ... That s what I felt happened, too. ... Dave Berri at CSUB has pointed out that Bob Belotti s points created method (and probably other linear weights
        Message 3 of 3 , May 9, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, nik <nikoz6@y...> wrote:
          >
          > All of the above make sense. Also...
          > Amare came "out of nowhere" (in some people's
          > opinion) and impressed, while Yao underachieved,
          > compared to some people's inflated expctations.
          >

          That's what I felt happened, too.

          > Kirilenko's case is similar. Many ppl thnk that
          > he deserved the 6th man award. But Bobby Jackson
          > won it and he's not a bad choice (just like Amare
          > isn't either). IMVHO this tends to show that the
          > strongest factor is team success. Also, that people
          > care basically just about the per game averages,
          > not per/36min and formulas results.
          > Could politics/increased patriotism have something
          > to do with it as well?

          Dave Berri at CSUB has pointed out that Bob Belotti's points created
          method (and probably other linear weights methods) actually do a
          pretty decent job reflecting voter perceptions. See

          http://www.csub.edu/~dberri/NBAanalysis.html

          Not that this is the goal of the methods, or maybe it is. I think
          politics have some role and that's intertwined with expectations.
          Yao set the bar for his success quite high early in the season,
          whereas Amare had almost no expectations and subsequent team success
          with high visibility. As Dave likes to point out, Carlos Boozer was
          also a good rookie but didn't even make the 1st team. My sense is
          that Boozer wasn't the impact rookie, more like a Horace Grant type
          who does well what he needs to do, but doesn't try to take over a
          team.

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