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

tendex stuff

Expand Messages
  • bchaikin@aol.com
    ... was way way better than Dimaggio s, more than could be made up for by an occasional ... way way better? lets look at some other numbers - while his
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 3, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      >Dimaggio had better defense, no question.  But the Splendid Splinter was the >greatest hitter who ever lived and who wasn't named Babe Ruth.  His offense was >way way better than Dimaggio's, more than could be made up for by an occasional
      >great catch or throw....

      way way better? lets look at some other numbers - while his lifetime AVG is better, .344-.325, his OB% much better, .483-.398 - but both numbers still great - and his slugging better, .634-.579, teddy ballgame's lifetime RBI/PA was .188, Dimaggio's was better at .200. williams RS/PA was .184, dimaggio's .181. scoring and driving in runs is what the game is all about, and at that they are quite comparable. if dimaggio wasn't a great fielder, i'd say certainly williams was the better ballplayer. but if dimaggio saved, say, just 20 hits every year with his superior fielding moreso than williams would, is that analogous to as adding 20 hits to his stats veery year for comparison to williams? i don't know...

      they seem quite comparable to me. you could say dimaggio had better hitters around him, i could say he was a better clutch hitter. all i can say is that my father saw them both play quite a few times, and while he admitted williams was a better hitter, he said both were still great hitters, but he also said he never ever saw a fielder anywhere near as smooth as dimaggio, including tris speaker (pop was born in 1915 and had told me of sneaking into league park as a kid). as for that only being "...an occasional great catch or throw...", if you were a major league pitcher you might feel differently...

      >Yep the OR cancels the FG, so you're back where you started..

      think about what you just said, "...the OR cancels the FG...". how could it cancel it if the OR has a value of 1 and the missed FG just 2/3? if a DEF REB has a value of 1, how could an OFF REB be just 2/3? each one is possession of the ball...

      you are right - the OFF REB cancels the missed FG because both are values of 1....you have to regain possession of the missed shot with an OFF REB, nobody has possession of a missed shot - its a free ball, like a jump ball, both teams have a chance for it. you're thinking that on average 1/3 of all rebounds are off and 2/3 def, which is true, but no rebound is guaranteed to go one way or the other when its in the air. only one team will get possession of any single rebound, and that is a single possession for either team. nobody gets 1/3 or 2/3 of a single possession...

      if a player takes a shot and misses, and the opponent gets a def reb, the player lost that possession without scoring, and the opponent regained possession. if a possession is on average worth 1 point, then the missed FG is worth a negative point and the def reb a positive point...

      if the player shot and missed and got his own off reb he lost possession and regained possession of the ball. its the same team possession, but not the same player possession because once he missed the shot 10 players in all had a chance to grab the rebound...

      >
      so its just a coincidence that possessions happen to be worth one point...

      yes - for the last 20-25 years if not longer...

      >but even if you're already in the penalty, fouling a player and sending him to the line for FTAs is not costing your team a point, not relative to where your team is...

      if you commit 4 fouls before the bonus, 2 non-shooting and 2 shooting, thats four FTA for 4 fouls, a ratio of 1 PF for 1 FTA, the league average for the past 20+ years. any more fouls in that quarter and the ratio is then 2 FTA per 1 foul - that increases the overall ratio of FTA/PF from 1/1 to something higher for that quarter. i.e. the more fouls you commit, the more your opponent is in the bonus situation, the greater the ratio of FTA/PF during that quarter...

      >
      the average foul is worth well under 1 point, under 0.4 points for that matter..

      if in the past 23-24 years the number of fouls has been 1,096,316 and the number of free throws made 985,368, and you only get to the free throw line (other than technicals and off fouls - a small sample of the population) by being fouled - tell me again how this makes a foul worth on average - just 0.4 points?...

      >i and i think most observers would agree that his true rating is a step below bird-air-magic...

      i observe that the difference between magic and air (.696-.668=.028) is more than the difference between bird and robinson (.634-.608=.026). does that mean robinson is worse than bird as much as jordan is worse than magic? the bottom line here is that any rating above .600 in the playoffs for as many playoff games that these guys have played is truly outstanding, the slight differences between .600+ ratings notwithstanding...

      robinson's regular season career tendex is .721 compared to bird's "lowly" .709, but i wouldn't say bird's a step below the admiral. hakeem olajuwon's career regular season tendex is .671 (and playoff is .688), while robinson's are .721 (and .608), but i wouldn't consider olajuwon a whole step below robinson for regular season performance. a .600+ rating in the playoffs is just damn good. there are many starting players who have played for multiple championship teams with a much worse playoff tendex than robinson's .608. if robinson had played for say 3 championship teams with that same rating, would you be saying this?..

      charles barkley's career regular season tendex is .685, his playoff .657, better than robinson's playoff tendex of .608. but he has zero championship rings....

      i think the problem with robinson as people see it is that he hasn't been a great (even good) scorer the past few seasons. he hasn't averaged 20 pts/g in four years. but his tendex is still real high because he does other things great - rebound, pass, get steal, block shots. he's on a team where he doesn't have to be the dominant scorer anymore. his first 7 years in the league he led the spurs in scoring while still doing all those other things...

      bob chaikin
      bchaikin@...



















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