Yao and Amare
- --- 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
>All of the above make sense. Also...
> 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
> 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.
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
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
- --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, nik <nikoz6@y...> wrote:
>That's what I felt happened, too.
> 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 thatDave Berri at CSUB has pointed out that Bob Belotti's points created
> 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?
method (and probably other linear weights methods) actually do a
pretty decent job reflecting voter perceptions. See
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