Comments on: The Hawks, Post-Sweep

By: tgt

tgt — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 18:51:20 +0000

Sometimes sweeps spell future doom for a franchise, and sometimes they merely strengthen the team's resolve. Only in hindsight can we really tell which team falls in which category. I call BS. The information shows that a sweep means nothing. Why you insist on creating stupid storylines is beyond comprehension.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:55:24 +0000

Was anybody saying Atlanta were falling off the cliff - no - I think we all just reached the conclusion they hit their ceiling ... which your data kinda confirms for me Neil. Last year was their chance to close the gap, I didn't see it in the playoffs.

Can you find out how many other teams have been swept in the second round of the playoffs and spent almost $200 million to keep the same unit together???

I'm still picking Atlanta to be better than every eastern conference team they were better than last year ... except Miami ...

By: Jason J

Jason J — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 01:37:25 +0000

Here in New York we call it a dream of a better tomorrow.

By: Greyberger

Greyberger — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:44:34 +0000

Here in Texas we call it the Matt Bonner effect =)

By: Jason J

Jason J — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 18:06:47 +0000

What Greyberger says is absolutely correct, though from a purely logistical (as opposed to statistical) frame of mind, it may make sense for Bosh's numbers to be not so great while his on court value remains high.

Here's a big who likes to play away from the basket and rebounds well. So, conceptually anyway, a defense may lock one of its big man defenders on Bosh on the perimeter opening greater space for Wade and James to make their drives to the rim. Also (again in theory because I only watched the game against Boston and the game against Orlando and don't actually recall this being the case), his ability to play the pick and pop game promises to open lanes.

None of that actually leads to any stats for Bosh, but it does help out his teammates.

By: Neil Paine

Neil Paine — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:03:42 +0000

What Greyberger said.

By: Greyberger

Greyberger — Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:39:18 +0000

Re:6, Adjusted +- won't explain why Bosh has been in the most productive heat lineups in the first two games.

If you want to know why Bosh's +/- numbers in that second game look so good, go to http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20101027&game=MIAPHI . He was in the entire game (a blowout) except for the start of the second and fourth, which coincided with Philly bench rallies. In the first game, his raw +/- was second-worst. To draw any conclusions you have to dig deeper into the other 9 guys on the floor and make subjective adjustments.

What adjusted +/- does is take many seasons worth of this information and estimates the effects of the other nine players. The more data the better when you're trying to untangle player combinations that either play together too often or not enough to get a true bead on their contributions in small samples.

By: huevonkiller

huevonkiller — Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:00:41 +0000

I think APM is among the most unreliable of advanced stats. I'd wait for Stat plus-minus.

By: Leroy Smith

Leroy Smith — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 01:56:25 +0000

Neil, if you don't remember I'm a Wins Produced (WP) fan, but I love adjusted +/- and the related research as well. I have a question for you that WP can't answer. How is it that Bosh, whom traditional stats say is the worse of the "big 3", has been the far and away best player as far as +/-? I mean, he has Shaq-like numbers circa 2000 when comes to +/- for the first 2 heat games. Please forgive me for not responding to this story guys. If anyone else can help me with this, let me know. Oh, and i know it's only 2 games.

By: Bronn

Bronn — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:45:09 +0000

A lot of teams who get swept realize that it's a fault of their fundamental flaws and make serious personnel changes to address those issues. The Hawks' only significant change in personnel is at the head coaching position.