-
Re: Kobe 2007
Originally Posted by Odinn
TS% and PER are just BS.
I haven't seen a person that can explain that 0.44 multiplier properly. Everyone defends TS%, says it's being used for eliminate technicals and and-ones. But noone care to calculate season by season the actual numbers for them. Even so-called analysts.
You realize calculating the 0.44 "properly" still has very miniscule results on the overall number, right? It's sorta irrelevant.
-
Re: Kobe 2007
Originally Posted by Young X
This is ridiculous. Makes it look so easy.
-
Re: Kobe 2007
Originally Posted by WayOfWade
The only player that couldn't be constituted as great is Neil Johnson. Everyone else is a great player.
It's Neil Johnston*... Neil Johnson is another player.
And for what he did during his time (fg% titles I'm assuming helps his PER) production and accolades combined was pretty great. I'm guessing most judge it since it was accomplished in the 50's.
-
Re: Kobe 2007
Originally Posted by Electric Slide
1st round exit.
I thought Kobe was all about the ships?
Yes 5 actually.
-
Laker Nation
Re: Kobe 2007
Originally Posted by cos88
4 years before he raped a white girl
...
6 years later he led his stacked team to a 7th seed.
so he raped someone in 2011?
-
NBA All-star
Re: Kobe 2007
Yeah, if you count FTA as .50 of a true shot instead of .44 it yields very similar results. It's just used to estimate FTAs that don't take up extra possessions on a bigger sample size. If you use offensive or defensive rating to rank team offenses or defenses, then there shouldn't be any issue with TS%
-
Re: Kobe 2007
Originally Posted by SilkkTheShocker
he wanted to trade Bynum for Jason Kidd.
Sound like a good idea in retrospect.
-
Re: Kobe 2007
7 different 50+ pt games in a 17 game stretch. Oh lawd.
-
#BlackExcellence
Re: Kobe 2007
Possible the greatest stretch of stat-padding ever.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|