Not every campaign ends on Election Day

by JakeTheSnake on Oct 13, 2008 12:03 AM EDT in The clubhouse Comment 11 comments

Airbg2_medium

Remember last year when Bullets Forever and Mister Irrelevant campaigned to get Nick Young in the Slam Dunk Contest? Well, the campaign is back again this year and this time around we've got an entire page dedicated to the effort of getting Nick Young into the 2009 Slam Dunk Contest.

The page is chock full of highlights, quotes, and wallpapers that you can use to help spread the word and hopefully get our high-flying sophmore into the Slam Dunk Contest this February. Check it out now, and start gearing up for what should be a memorable campaign. The sky's the limit!

2 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Dave Berri agrees with the Nick Young is a disaster hypothesis

http://www.suu.edu/faculty/berri/Wizards0708.html

And losing Mason was a big deal if Young replaces his minutes. McGuire doesn’t look so bad (positive if below average win score) and Songaila should never see the floor. Replace Songaila with above average Blatche and Thomas (maybe McGuire) and Wiz improve considerably.

by billyjoe on Oct 13, 2008 11:11 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

chill out dude.

This post is about NY in a dunk contest.

And I checked the link and the corresponding blog, and it never says anything close to calling Nick Young a disaster, or playing him a “disaster hypothesis.”

by Aldo on Oct 13, 2008 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wins produced is dumb

The formula significantly undervalues scoring and significantly overvalues rebounding. Hence, Young’s placement.

You can’t just take wins and then regress them to the individual level. Basketball’s too complex for that.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Oct 13, 2008 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And you're being annoying, as usual

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Oct 13, 2008 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Shoot

I want JaVale McGee in the contest too. Big fella can fly, Dwight showed Bigs can win now too.

by doclinkin on Oct 13, 2008 12:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

more to it.

There’s more to the dunk contest than just “flying” – although I agree, McGee can really fly…

I doubt he has the in-air creativity needed to compete in the dunk contest…

On the other hand, I’ve seen Nick Young’s creativity… (Mostly in practice, and on YouTube)… and he can do some special things in the air.

by Rook6980 on Oct 14, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Scoring is overrated. When the Sixers replaced Iverson with Miller, they got much better, as Berri and winscore predicted. And if the Wiz replace Mason with Young, they will get much worse.

I don’t buy the “more than the sum of the parts” argument either. Were the Celtics more than the sum of the parts? Berri predicted that with Garnett, who has been at the top of the winscore ratings for years, they would be much better, and they were. No special sauce necessary.

by billyjoe on Oct 14, 2008 1:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Garnett

ANY team that gets Garnett will be “much better”.

The same could be said about ANY of the NBA’s top 5-10 players.
ANY team that gets Kobe Bryant will be “much better”

Were the Celtics more than the sum of the parts? YES
Take Pierce and Allen off that team, and they’re the Minnesota Timberwolves.

by Rook6980 on Oct 14, 2008 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never said anything about more than the sum of parts

I’m saying it’s dumb to regress wins to the individual level. It makes no sense theoretically because basketball is such a team game. It’s okay to do that in baseball, but in basketball, where everyone’s production is dependent on each other, it’s silly.

You’re looking at this the wrong way. Inefficient scoring, which Iverson had demonstrated for years in Philly, is overrated. (Iverson also went to the finals and the Sixers had significantly more success with him than they have had without him). Nick Young’s rookie true shooting percentage is better than Iverson’s career true shooting percentage, and Young’s just a rookie. Berri takes this a step further and says scoring itself is overrated. That’s just silly. There’s value in someone who can put the ball in the hoop at a decent efficiency.

Wins produced completely disregards the importance of roles and how they should be played. That’s why it’s dumb.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Oct 14, 2008 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s true that team of Shaq’s would have a high win score and low winning percentage. That’s true at the extreme. For most teams, win score is predictive, as demonstrated by the Celtics after Garnett, Sixers after Iverson, and Suns after losing Marion.

We can both agree, the more possessions the better. Nick Young’s true awfulness isn’t expressed by his true shooting percentage. If there were a stat for shooting efficiency per possession, Nick Young would be at the bottom of the list. Every turnover is one less possession, and every missed rebound is the equivalent of a turnover (opportunity costs are real costs).

by billyjoe on Oct 14, 2008 10:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The whole discussion is dumb anyway

I honestly don’t care how predicative win score is (and I’m not sure where you’re going with Marion…it said Phoenix would get worse, but they were still a 55-win team that was just two games out of first). I just hate it’s theoretical basis, though I do think it can sometimes be interesting. But for all of Win Score’s success stories, it has its flops. For example, Win Score still believes Jason Kidd is an elite PG. It proclaims success for Joey Dorsey, which I doubt is ever coming. It says that Dennis Rodman was a better player than Michael Jordan in 1996. Like all models, it has strengths and weaknesses.

A discussion about Nick Young’s game has nothing to do with this post, though. It would be very cool for him to be in the Dunk Contest, and it’s fun to start a “movement” to get him in there. It doesn’t have anything to do with his game. This is why everyone hates you here; you inject a critique of Young’s game into places where such critique doesn’t belong. If such behavior continues into the season, you will be banned. I’m sorry. Don’t play innocent either, because you know exactly what you are doing.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Oct 14, 2008 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs