Till we meet again

[Oracle]

Good for you, Oracle, I'm not surprised to hear that you're such an accomplished person.  For my part, between the barrage of oracular ad hominums and straw man arguments (and yet you seem to wonder why I tend to respond obliquely to you), I'm gaining the sense that there's a more constructive use of time and psychic energy.  It's a great forum, one that's meant a lot to me, and I'm not planning to be among those you've chased away.  But taking a little break until there's draft news to discuss seems like a good idea.  You've been a pivotal part of keeping the forum going.  To respond in kind to your earlier popular culture reference: "with great power comes great responsibility."

Happy Father's day to all fathers.

I won't respond to your veiled attacks in this post and move on!

BTW, speaking of Nate Silver, you omitted the full title of his book, it's "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't".

Here are some Nate Silver links for the board:
Nate Silver: 'Prediction is a really important tool, it's not a game'

Heat’s Clutch Stats Meet Match in Spurs’ Strategy

[Sebastian]

You know, I was thinking rather than beg the Magic to accept OUR #8 Pick, #57 Pick, and Singler, WE should just draft Shabazz Muhammad.

Full disclosure: I, personally, lambasted this kid upon my first reviews of his game. On another Board (that PistonPowered site), I call the dude, the 21st Century edition of Jack "Goose" Givens.

But, truth be told, the kid has come a long ways since starting his freshman season a couple months late. He's gotten into much better shape/condition. And, the dude knows his job description well. I predict that if he's placed in the right situation, he will prove to be a scoring machine.

First off, he's a left-handed SG. He has range on his jumper and he is not afraid to post up smaller defenders. He also gets to the line at a good clip. All the things that you want from your starting 2-guard.

And, there is a large intangible that he has that seems just right for the Pistons - the kid has been picked on and dissed by the national sports media.

He may just fit right in with OUR Pistons.

http://www.mynbadraft.com/NBA-Draft-Profiles-2013/Shabazz-Muhammad

[Sebastian]

Perhaps, Mo' has seen something in Stuckey that the previous coaches, since Flip have yet to realize.

Since, Mo' has served as the Assistant Head Coach (the 2008-2009 season) at OKC, Stuckey has had some fairly decent outings versus the Thunder.



*The above stats are provided by NBAReference.com
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stuckro01.html.

Thanks for this Sebastian, please don't tax me for using it in the fashion that I'm getting ready to.
In five years averaging 34 minutes a night Stuckey's scoring average is 17 pts. with 4 assists and 2 turnovers. In nine games Stuckey scored over 30 pts. once and over 20 pts. twice; this is coming from a ball dominate PG/combo guard, or whatever you want to call him, the fact is, the teams offense was dependent on him distributing the ball and getting the team involved in the offense or be an alpha scorer, like Westbrook! Is Mo Cheeks hair blown back by the numbers or does he see Westbrook in Stuckey? If he does, well.............  

DX, you're position regarding Stuckey is respected by me and I am sure by others who would like to give OUR boy, Stuckey, just one more chance.

But, when digesting Stuckey's statistics it is like the great writer and philosopher, Mark Twain said about statistics:

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

If given the opportunity to play significant minutes and hopefully start at the PG position, while being coached by the 11th place leader in NBA assist with 7,392 and 5th in steals with 2,310, who also won a Title as a starting PG in 1983 with Philly, Stuckey can either prove that he is worthy of the opportunity or like Wise (I think) said can be moved by the Trade Deadline or not have his contract renewed, when it expires at seasons end.

And, Stuckey contract situation may prove to motivate his play, this season as well; as he is in the final year of his current contract and will surely be looking for a decent contract that will pay him into his early 30's.

But, of course it is not all about Stuckey. The roster has to get better. WE need a "real" starting SG and a "real" starting SF.

Pardon me for repeating myself: But, maybe WE should move the #8 Pick, the #56, and Kyle Singler to Orlando for Aaron Afflalo and go after Josh Smith (SF)--who can always slid over to the PF position, when WE go small or when Moose is in foul trouble--hard.

Back to Stuckey: A more balanced roster, without a crowded backcourt, with a personable and classy coach, will do wonders for OUR boy, Stuckey. (I hope.)

[Sparma]

Good for you, Oracle, I'm not surprised to hear that you're such an accomplished person.  For my part, between the barrage of oracular ad hominums and straw man arguments (and yet you seem to wonder why I tend to respond obliquely to you), I'm gaining the sense that there's a more constructive use of time and psychic energy.  It's a great forum, one that's meant a lot to me, and I'm not planning to be among those you've chased away.  But taking a little break until there's draft news to discuss seems like a good idea.  You've been a pivotal part of keeping the forum going.  To respond in kind to your earlier popular culture reference: "with great power comes great responsibility."

Happy Father's day to all fathers.

[deusXango]

LOL, if he sees Westbrook, get ready, the pipe is ready to be passed

I think it's more like what I said earlier, Stuckey has shown flashes, but no consistency!

I don't have a lot of patience for Stuckey to improve, but don't you think he deserves a chance to get coached for a change?

Ok, I hear you that he was part of the nasty stuff that went on, but IMO, that stuff was silently allowed by Joe to fester! Remember Joe was silent for way too long before stepping in and cleaning it up!

Oracle, out of respect for your dedication to the man, I'm willing to keep an open mind until the trade deadline (providing he's not traded before then) and see what comes of Stuckey being coached by a HOF player with championship credentials. If he continues to suck, I won't say "I told you so" but, should he flower I'll be the first to acknowledge you. Granted, Joe has been the biggest problem this franchise has had to deal with for a number of reasons, but......

[deusXango]

Read up on Bayesian probability and get back to me, Oracle, once you have some sense of what you're dismissing without knowing about it.  Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise is an excellent place to look.  It includes a chapter on basketball.

Get real, I'm an Electrical Engineer, I know Bayesian theory WAY better than you do, taking several courses in Statistical Probability, and actually living it in engineering calculations!

I know you're blowing smoke, but I don't care! BTW, you don't need any theory, you just haven't addressed anything I said, and came back with unrelated stuff!

But if you want to get into the mathematics of this, bring it on!

Oh sh!t, somebody spilled a can of worms; I'm going to follow up on the clean-up tomorrow because it looks like it may be messy.

[Oracle]

LOL, if he sees Westbrook, get ready, the pipe is ready to be passed

I think it's more like what I said earlier, Stuckey has shown flashes, but no consistency!

I don't have a lot of patience for Stuckey to improve, but don't you think he deserves a chance to get coached for a change?

Ok, I hear you that he was part of the nasty stuff that went on, but IMO, that stuff was silently allowed by Joe to fester! Remember Joe was silent for way too long before stepping in and cleaning it up!

[deusXango]

Would the words Strongly Dislike work better?
Wise, I ain't mad at you brother, never; we want the same thing and are tied together by the golden string of fandom. We go for the gusto when expressing our thoughts on what will bring about a better team, that's all. Happy Fathers Day to all the fathers and dads (you dads know what I mean). 

[Oracle]

Read up on Bayesian probability and get back to me, Oracle, once you have some sense of what you're dismissing without knowing about it.  Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise is an excellent place to look.  It includes a chapter on basketball.

Get real, I'm an Electrical Engineer, I know Bayesian theory WAY better than you do, taking several courses in Statistical Probability, and actually living it in engineering calculations!

I know you're blowing smoke, but I don't care! BTW, you don't need any theory, you just haven't addressed anything I said, and came back with unrelated stuff!

But if you want to get into the mathematics of this, bring it on!

[deusXango]

Perhaps, Mo' has seen something in Stuckey that the previous coaches, since Flip have yet to realize.

Since, Mo' has served as the Assistant Head Coach (the 2008-2009 season) at OKC, Stuckey has had some fairly decent outings versus the Thunder.



*The above stats are provided by NBAReference.com
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stuckro01.html.

Thanks for this Sebastian, please don't tax me for using it in the fashion that I'm getting ready to.
In five years averaging 34 minutes a night Stuckey's scoring average is 17 pts. with 4 assists and 2 turnovers. In nine games Stuckey scored over 30 pts. once and over 20 pts. twice; this is coming from a ball dominate PG/combo guard, or whatever you want to call him, the fact is, the teams offense was dependent on him distributing the ball and getting the team involved in the offense or be an alpha scorer, like Westbrook! Is Mo Cheeks hair blown back by the numbers or does he see Westbrook in Stuckey? If he does, well.............  

[Sparma]

Read up on Bayesian probability and get back to me, Oracle, once you have some sense of what you're dismissing without knowing about it.  Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise is an excellent place to look.  It includes a chapter on basketball.

[Oracle]

Perhaps, Mo' has seen something in Stuckey that the previous coaches, since Flip have yet to realize.

Since, Mo' has served as the Assistant Head Coach (the 2008-2009 season) at OKC, Stuckey has had some fairly decent outings versus the Thunder.



*The above stats are provided by NBAReference.com
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stuckro01.html.

Great work Seb, this is the way you use stats properly!

You use it to gain insight on how you might help a player improve! It's the flashes a player shows that lets you know the capability is there, and then if you're a good coach, you can bring the excellence to the fore!

Interesting, Cheeks may have seen something he can latch onto to make Stuckey a better player... good luck Cheeks, because a Stuckey playing to his potential would be an awesome thing!

[Oracle]

It's about probabilities and trying to refine those.  I find Nate Silver more convincing than Ben Affleck.

Wow, that's exactly the wrong conclusion!

Why? Because in the movie, they actually knew the future, you don't have a clue!

You nor they have the slightest clue as to the factors that affect the stats they use, and worse, the ones they do know, they don't take into account, and even worse than that, even if you did, I bet they don't have a clue as to how to use them(factor them in)!

Of course you can prove me wrong if you can show how you factor in the environment and other factors into a statistical analysis, but I know you can't and don't even try, or you would have included it long ago!

Sorry, you're looking at the past and attempting to predict the future, and if you actually thought about this, the proof is staring you in the face!

Run your stats on any draft and see how wrong you would be!

But what you're failing to see is that this prediction stuff is like the death penalty! In a community as small as the NBA, a widely held belief becomes a reality just because that's what they want it to be!

The evil of labeling someone early is what you're endorsing. Most folks that want that tend to not want that for themselves!

I'm sure this won't change anything, but there it is!

[Sebastian]

Perhaps, Mo' has seen something in Stuckey that the previous coaches, since Flip have yet to realize.

Since, Mo' has served as the Assistant Head Coach (the 2008-2009 season) at OKC, Stuckey has had some fairly decent outings versus the Thunder.



*The above stats are provided by NBAReference.com
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stuckro01.html.

[Sparma]

It's about probabilities and trying to refine those.  I find Nate Silver more convincing than Ben Affleck.

[Oracle]

I don't know if you ever saw the movie Paycheck. In that movie, they create an optical machine that can see around the curvature of the universe, if you could do that, you end up looking back at yourself, but you're not looking at yourself now, you're looking at yourself in the future! However, in that movie Ben Affleck makes a statement,

"If you know your future, you have no future! You take away the mystery, the hope! Whatever the machine predicts, we make happen! It predicts a war and we launch a preemptive strike to avoid the war, it predicts a plague and we herd sick people together and create a plague! Seeing the future will destroy us!" - Ben Affleck, PayCheck

That's where your analysis leads! You predict what a player should be, and you proceed as if it's factual and unchangeable even as you sometimes say it's possible, you return to your original prediction over and over again.

Joe may be doing the same thing, but it's dangerous because he will do whatever is in his power to make happen what he thinks will happen, and as we've all seen, that can destroy players careers.

[Sparma]

I think Memphis made a mistake in letting Hollins go.  I'll be interested in how their numbers driven decisions go though.

Past stats don't determine individual future performance.  At the same time, I'm with Bayesian Nate Silver in thinking that predictions are an important gauge of analysis, facilitating updating.  He started as a Tigers fan in East Lansing, then moved on to baseball projections, then to putting pundits to shame in his presidential predictions.

So I do think venturing predictions is part of the sports analysis game.

The Francona biography gives a graphic example.  Notoriously, Grady Little left Pedro Martinez in against the 2003 Yankees, who pummeled him in the 8th inning.  I confess that at the time I was with Little in thinking sticking with the great and gutsy Martinez was preferable to turning to the bullpen.  It turns out that part of the reason the Boston brass was so upset with Little was that they had run a study showing batters hit .370 that year against Pedro after his 105th pitch, outhitting Ty Cobb after having been Ray Oyler-eske before that.  Pedro left after his 123th pitch, with the season all but over. 

Those stats didn't mean Pedro couldn't have gotten out of the inning; still, Little, evidently impatient with the numbers crunchers and relying on a gut instinct, was a fool to ignore the numbers.

[WTF]

Would the words Strongly Dislike work better?

[Oracle]

Sparma, while I love your analysis of almost everything, the one area I don't feel comfortable with is when it applies to players in a predictive fashion.

You certainly could get a job in Memphis, where the main reason Hollins was in conflict was that the new management were basing decisions on players futures almost solely on statistics! I know it's the new trend in the NBA, and there is a use for it in analyzing certain things, but as a human predictor, I don't like it, but that's just my opinion!

"I know by now Cheeks has given Joe D his analysis of the PG situation in Detroit.  I think he will plan on teaching both BK7 and Stuckey...and a PG 2nd rounder to replace Bynum.  Calderon is NOT an issue and will not be signed.  The only reason Joe D signed Cheeks is b/c he wants Cheeks to produce quality PGs like Billups out of BK7 and Stuckey.  Once they are maximized in their potential you will find them mesh with Dre and Moose and the rest is history."

I hope you're right, because that duo is a potentially potent combination of speed and size which cold cause a lot of problems! However, I am sympathetic to the calls to dump Stuckey, so he needs to be on a very short leash, but I just have a feeling that Stuckey will respond to the structure of a proven championship PG in Cheeks, and that between Cheeks and Arnie working with Knight, we'll see a lot of improvement by the allstar break!

@DX - Dx, I'm not going to argue with what you're saying, it's all true! I just hope that if Stuckey isn't traded, you at least give him a half a season to see where he's at! IMO, Stuckey deserves one last chance with a teaching coach after the slugs he's had to contend with before saying goodby!

Note to Posters: I just discovered that the last icon on the 2nd row allows you to switch the editor mode to the old editor format or the new by selecting it again. Kind of useful in some situations!

[Sparma]

I’m sure that assists reflect a lot of variables, including coaching and teammates.  From the spot checking I’ve done recently , it looks like after a year of two, the ratios become pretty predictable, albeit that they improve as the player nears his peak.  Put differently, I’d venture the hypothesis that after the rookie year and once steady minutes are established, the player’s performance the preceding year is the best predictor of the ratio that follows (if we include movement up to a peak, then down), rather than external circumstances.
I can only use individual examples to back this, so far.  For instance, Jose Calderon’s ratio decreased in moving to Detroit’s chaotic environment, but his ratio remained more aligned with his own performance rather than with, say, BK’s.
 I used the three most extreme examples I could remember of a team improving radically to run a check.  As rookies, Lew Alcindor/ Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Larry Bird, and Tim Duncan contributed to vast improvement of their respective teams.  Unfortunately, in the first two cases I can’t check on ratios, my main interest, because T.O.s weren’t tracked yet.    
Flynn Robinson, who died a few weeks ago, may have experienced the most radical swings in team fortunes of any NBA player.  On a lousy Milwaukee team, he averaged 4.9 assists, then 5.5 on an outstanding team with Kareem.  Once traded to Cincinnati, he moves to 1.9 assists, which strongly suggests the importance of externals.  His minutes were way down though (with Norm Van Lier leading the league in assists and Tiny Archibald arriving).  His assists per 36 minutes went from 5.6 (on a bad Milwaukee team) to 5.9 (great team) to 3.6 (weak Cincinnati team) to 4.9 (great Lakers team).  So in the most extreme example I know of, there’s significant variation, though not the neat correlation to team performance one might expect. 
When Oscar Robertson goes a losing Cincinnati team to a great Milwaukee team, his assists move from 8.1 to 8.2, then down each of his last 3 seasons.  Essentially, he peaks early in his career, then moves slowly downwards during the last decade of his career, with the first year with Kareem throwing off that pattern just slightly. 
On a bad Celtics team in 1978-1979, Chris Ford and Tiny Archibald tied for the lead in assists per game at 4.7 (with Tiny having a significantly better per 36 minutes average).  With the arrival of Larry Bird, Archibald jumped to 8.4 per game, while Ford slid to 2.9 (the two pre-Bird leaders went from 9.2 to 11.3).  While Tiny’s average per game jumped dramatically, his per 36 minutes average increased more modestly, from 7 to 8.4.
The huge leap of San Antonio with Tim Duncan provides me with the first chance to compare ratios.  On a very weak 1996-1997 Spurs team, Avery Johnson had an excellent 3.58 assists to TOs ratio, totaling 6.8 assists per game.  His ratio the following year on an outstanding Spurs team was virtually identical (3.59; with 7.9 assists per game).
Not sure what it all means, but it looks even the most dramatic team improvements don’t correlate closely with PG performance.  That suggests more moderate fluctuations would show even less of a correlation.

[Go Stones!]

Where to go from here...

I know by now Cheeks has given Joe D his analysis of the PG situation in Detroit.  I think he will plan on teaching both BK7 and Stuckey...and a PG 2nd rounder to replace Bynum.  Calderon is NOT an issue and will not be signed.  The only reason Joe D signed Cheeks is b/c he wants Cheeks to produce quality PGs like Billups out of BK7 and Stuckey.  Once they are maximized in their potential you will find them mesh with Dre and Moose and the rest is history. 

I do believe Joe D will add another PF/C as a backup option ahead of CV and JJ, but a huge trade will occur for a quality SF....Pierce?  Deng?  Granger?  (my best guess)

In the meantime, Singler and Middleton will take care of the backup roll for SF. 

The first round pick?  I think it will be either a SF or PF.

[Go Stones!]

Why?  Let's look at the facts (correct me if I'm wrong).  Joe made a huge mistake when he drafted Darko.  He eventually traded him to a team for their 1st round draft pick.  I believe that draft pick produced Stuckey!  Joe D wants to look at this pick and say, "at least I fixed it...!"  He wants his worst decision as GM was corrected to produce an all-star or at least a starter.

[deusXango]

I have read all the stuff about Stuckey being the best option and that Knight should be coming off the bench. Yet those of you who write this crap must not actually watch the game much. All of the past coaches can't be wrong about Stuckey. - cool breeze

Sorry but the fact that all 4 coaches have been fired any opinion they can offer on Stuckey can't be worth much with perhaps Flip being the only exception and the coach in which Stuckey showed the most promise.  

Flip is the only coach that Stuckey came off the bench for until Lil' Larry last year, and Flip was let go in great part because Stuckey would've continued to come off the bench along side Afflalo. After Flip all the coaches had marching orders to start Stuckey and give him all the PT he could handle, regardless of his on court blunders and selfishness as a PG; I believe Cheeks has come in under the same demands but, only time will tell.

Don, if it wasn't for this Love Jones you have for Knight you wouldn't find the comment about Stuckey so off based. 

That comment was like organizing; you don't mix your beans with peas, or put your apples and oranges in the same basket. What I got from Don's statement was, would it have hurt to address the question about Knight with his feelings based exclusively on Knight's potential and/or performance. That's not love, it's logic my friend.

DX, you made it clear you just plain hate Stuckey mainly for a lot of things he didn't have control over, with all the sh!t he's been through I'm surprise he didn't fake injuries all season.  
Wise, hate is a strong word for you to direct at a human in my behalf, particularly someone whom I don't know; I hate the way he plays a game that I love, I hate the way team decisions have been made to accommodate him, and I hate the "air" he carries with being given a sense of entitlement, that he didn't earn. I hate the fact that those who have a love jones for Stuckey, blames his coaches for his lack of development as a player (successfully finishing at the rim, improving on his mid-range game, and working on his outside shot); coaches should be blamed for allowing him to eat up the shot clock with his antics with the ball, not benching him for constantly ignoring open team mates, and his lackadaisical approach to becoming an on court leader. Goddamn man, look around you; there is an army of fans who say the same things that I do, and want Stuckey gone from the team but, I don't think they hate him, they just know we can do soooooooooooooo much better, and this is after a long audition process. 

[Oracle]

"There's an important disanalogy, though, in that in his second year Parker's assist to TO ratio was 2.208 (quite respectable) compared to Knight's lousy 1.481.  Tony's ratio this year is 2.923.  In other words, the jump from BK's second year to Parker's second year would be greater than Parker's own jump was from his second year to his current performance!  If Parker's leap from young pro to his current level is impressive (and it is!), Knight's potential improvement to Parker's level would need to be more than twice as impressive in degree of difficulty as Parker's was.  Could happen, but what are the odds?"

Good post, and my only quibble is that I believe BK7 does a LOT better if he had Parkers team vs the clown act he inherited here!

However, I think lemonpen had it right, we will have to wait to see what he's worked on over the summer to get a better idea of where he's at. I want what's best for the Pistons, and while Knight has shown flashes of great potential, he's also shown the reverse... time will tell, but he deserves the opportunity to develop!

Shout out to lemon, I'm drooling at the goodness to be delivered when we get the unvarnished skinny of this coaching search!

IMO, Joe got his man, but Gores gave him the rope! What I mean is that Joe got the man he thought he could get out of Gores, and Gores went along for two reasons.
1. He wanted a cheap coach
2. One with a short contract 3 years
3. One that had the probability of failure so he could move in his LA crew

In short, I believe this is a setup for Joe to fail and get tossed!

However, IMO, it's going to backfire, because Cheeks really is kind of the right guy for this team, but the jury is out on whether it saves Joe's behind or not.

Gores, looking for any excuse could use a first round bad loss as an excuse! IMO, if we don't get out of the first round, or we aren't seeded 6 or better, Joe remains on thin ice!

[Sparma]

That's an insightful response concerning Knight, Oracle.

I'm enjoying reading Phil Jackson's 11 Rings.  Naturally, he emphasizes the importance of coaching.  It's striking how much he moved around his guard corps: eg going big in opting to protect the declining Ron Harper rather than BJ Armstrong who just had been an All Star; telling Harper he needed to be more of a defensive guard).

Good coaches/ GMs try to do a variety of things which are sometimes in tension, I'd think.  For instance, you'd both want an optimal fit with the ideal you'd envision (eg LB's play the right way) and an accommodation to what your players actually have on offer (so that you can ride AI and a team built around him to the final in Philly).  So I have no problem with Joe looking for the ideal at PG (eg in acquiring Calderon) as long as he and the coach are willing to work with what they actually have, rather than fitting squares into round pegs (a la Stuckey and now, maybe, Knight).

Your mention of Parker is interesting, Oracle.  It's occurred to me (too) that his career may have the kind of trajectory we could hope for from Knight.  He's a bit undersized, depends heavily on speed and quickness.  Early, he seemed to lack team orientation to the point of Pop seriously contemplating trading him.  Now he may be the best PG in the game.

There's an important disanalogy, though, in that in his second year Parker's assist to TO ratio was 2.208 (quite respectable) compared to Knight's lousy 1.481.  Tony's ratio this year is 2.923.  In other words, the jump from BK's second year to Parker's second year would be greater than Parker's own jump was from his second year to his current performance!  If Parker's leap from young pro to his current level is impressive (and it is!), Knight's potential improvement to Parker's level would need to be more than twice as impressive in degree of difficulty as Parker's was.  Could happen, but what are the odds?

I'd rather look at the more probable ways of moving the team forward, like getting the ball consistently at the right time and spot into the two big guys who are far more likely to develop into stars than is Knight.  I like the odds of conventional PG like Calderon getting that crucial job done than BK's.

Of course, all that doesn't mean that BK couldn't make strides at PG.  It certainly does mean he can't become a valuable NBA player.

[Sponsored content]