BuzzerBeater Forums

Well, it's a tough call.

I agree assists are more important than most give cred for. And for some damned reason, Motion leads to fewer assists than some of the other offensive options. I suppose the question is efficiency.

In a 'outside' type of offense, such as I play.. the guards are going to shoot more than pass of course. On the 'inside' based offenses.. guess what, the guards will probably (and at times not which is strange) shoot less and pass more, leading to more assists and less points. So comes into play.. voila, efficiency. If Prado del Rey shot a better percentage, I'd be more likely to agree that he's worthy of being a top 3 PG. I am not sure he is, but then again, we all know I could care less about studying other teams.. at this time anyways.

As for which teams they come from, it's the typical argument you hear in professional basketball. Do players who put up nice numbers for a crappy team deserve the credit, as in All Star status or MVP. Could they do it on a winning team. Answer is, probably not since the better teams tend to have more than 1 or 2 options.. are more well rounded and spread the wealth (cue sports cliche bs). So as a team, with more options, the numbers are spread and look less impressive, yet if I had one of those inside guys from TF, he'd probably average a ton more than he does for TF.

Sorry for wall of text, glad you woke up.

On the 'inside' based offenses.. guess what, the guards will probably (and at times not which is strange) shoot less and pass more, leading to more assists and less points.

First, these are based on actual positions played during the regular season only.
Second, I invite you all to make your own lists or criticize at will.
Third, I didn't bother to adjust based on offense played or possessions per game if you want to get super technical.
Fourth, there is no easy way to accurately measure defense which would be a huge consideration to any position.

Last edited by Rambo at 4/13/2011 1:37:55 PM

And to add a bit, assists also come down to team mates of course.

Just taking a cursory look, TF as a team shot 45% from the field for the season. My team shot 35%. Now comes the big if, but if my team shot 45% from the field, could we tack an extra few assists or so for my guy? Of course we don't know, but it plays a part.

Plus, lets take the last guy I played and TF played. His PG shot 13 times. Mine shot 23. 10 less ops to get assists because of offense chosen. Plus TF got off 10 more shots in the game.

Guess I'm just saying, you can't go by pure assists per game #'s. There are some other factors to be considered.

Again, I'm not arguing for my guy, I'm just throwing some counterpoints.. whether valid or not. I'm not getting all happy because I had a top 3 PG and SF.. who played PF as much as any position :P

First, these are based on actual positions played during the regular season only.
Second, I invite you all to make your own lists or criticize at will.
Third, I didn't bother to adjust based on offense played or possessions per game if you want to get super technical.
Fourth, there is no easy way to accurately measure defense which would be a huge consideration to any position.

Oh, I appreciate the effort man. But some managers seem butt hurt over not having proper recognition for their players.. and I'm just throwing out ideas. In the end, only you know the criteria. And look, you started a few people posting, including me. So it must be a good subject.

Always have been awake, just quiet :)

I do appreciate the efforts in making these teams though, and I do think it shows an insight into different views of what makes a good player. Having played both inside and outside orients this season...I have a new appreciation for the need of passing on players and the advantages that having good passing makes to the team, so I lean more towards the assisting side than I would have in the past.

As for teams they come from, I still think its impressive a player like Kevin Love goes out and puts up 30/30 games. Would he do that if he had an Andrew Bynum playing next to him, probably not. So you really have to counterbalance numbers that are impressive by who else they play with. Really is a subjective matter, so I can't be critical of people who name teams based on their personal criteria.

None of this is a knock on your team but:

Cots, PGs & Assists:

I guess it kind of depends on what you value the assist as. I would characterize it as 1/3 of the effort (finding the open man vs. getting open and scoring). So you had 2.7 more assists than Fevre but 2.8 less points. Our average point per FGM this season was 2.135 (and yours was 2.058)

2.7*2.058/3 = 1.85 pts added. You'd have to conclude that an assist is worth half of a basket to make the differences equal which isn't unreasonable but then you also had higher turnovers.

Also, regarding this:

If I see someone playing PG and doesn't lead his team in assists, then I don't see a PG, just someone paying the position. In that regard, I don't actually see any PGs on your entire posted team.

It just conjures up images of LeBron James. Who's the real PG on his team, is it him, is it someone else? I sure don't know.

In the top 5 leagues in the USA only one person averages more than 6.1 assists (which is a pretty meager number in the NBA). The fact is, assists either aren't highly factored into the Game Engine or aren't stressed in training enough, but either way, they simply do not really exist as you (or I) would like.

That said I probably should have considered Youzhi as I did earlier in the season.

Second, I invite you all to make your own lists or criticize at will.

Since the gauntlet was thrown down, I'll throw up a list that is probably flawed. Too hard to go back and check on defense.. which is really close to not being able to evaluate properly.

In order of first to third. All stats are rounded.

PG
Louzhi of D.C. (14 PPG /3 RPG /8 APG)
Prado del Rey of GK (17 PPG /3 RPG /3 APG)
Cots of TF (13 PPG /4 RPG /6 APG)

SG
Amorrotu of NY (23 PPG /5 RPG /4 APG)
Lundy of Knick (23 PPG /4 RPG /4 APG)
Carmichael of Macs (18 PPG /5 RPG /3 APG)

SF
Paredes of D.C. (16 PPG /5 RPG /5 APG)
Waller of GK (18 PPG /7 RPG /3 APG)
Tapia of Slashing (17 PPG /4 RPG /3 APG)

PF
Timmons of Macs (18 PPG /10 RPG -59 FG% is tight)
Gascon of Spocker (18 PPG /13 RPG )
Ducoing of D.C. (15 PPG /15 RPG )

C
Turovas of 10 Inch (18 PPG / 11 RPG - 60% FG)
Negreiros of TF (17 PPG / 13 RPG - 56% FG)
Fuentes of Rash (18 PPG / 14 RPG - 44% FG drops him a bit)

At Shooting Guard:
1st team –W. Lundy – Knicktardeder – 23.7 / 3.9 / 4.3 – 44.0% / 36.8% / 62.0%
2nd team – M. Amorrortu – New York Jests – 23.2 / 5.5 / 4.3 – 39.7% / 28.5% / 74.7%
3rd team – J. Carmichael – I’ll Replace you With Jelly Beans – 18.4 / 5.0 / 3.0 – 39.9% / 31.5% / 76.7%

Fixed it for you. While we can't accurately measure defense we know Lundy's is far superior to any of your mercenaries.

Amorrortu is not a mercenary, he's a league MVP.

Anyone who plays for the Jests is a merc, no loyalty like every other New York team.

I guess it kind of depends on what you value the assist as. I would characterize it as 1/3 of the effort (finding the open man vs. getting open and scoring). So you had 2.7 more assists than Fevre but 2.8 less points. Our average point per FGM this season was 2.135 (and yours was 2.058)

2.7*2.058/3 = 1.85 pts added. You'd have to conclude that an assist is worth half of a basket to make the differences equal which isn't unreasonable but then you also had higher turnovers.

That said I probably should have considered Youzhi as I did earlier in the season.

Serious question. Why divide by 3 to come up with points added? Taking the numbers as legit, if my team averaged 2.058 points per FGM (field goal made, right?), then why divide by 3? An assist only recorded when a bucket is made, so wouldn't it just be 2.7*2.058?

On a different note, all the stats I posted were assist to turnover ratio. Nobody countered any of that in the discussion, only assists as a whole. I didn't argue straight assists. The counter arguments are some of the reasons why. I think when you look at assist:TO ratio, some big discrepancies are easy to see between players.

I am glad Fevre was brought up though as his is my biggest objection to being listed as a PG. He only played in 10 league games as a PG, which is less then half. He played a majority of league games as a SG. The way the game engine works, of course he has fewer Assists and TOs and more shot attempts. :)

I did make the "but the these teams were good this year, so thus they have to have all-stars on the team" argument. :) DC and I each made a very deep cup run knocking out NBBA teams and still finished with the top 2 records in the league while also playing in the toughest conference. I just think that out of the 10-12 starters on both our teams combined, one would be able to find oneplayer worthy of being in the top 3 in their respective position.


All that said, I bought Cots to be my SG, I just couldn't find/ afford a PG that was better, so he became my PG.

In trying to create an all star team, as you mentioned, without having good information about defensive contributions, it is basically impossible to build a perfect team that can withstand all criticism.