Give me the best and worst player on each of these short lists please.

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock;14039716]That assumes that 13/20 FTA guy takes 0 FG's to get to that high TS %.



It was random numbers, you get that point. That scenario was all two pointers. If that 9/25 and 9/10 FT guy is Harden the TS % numbers come out differently. I found a TS % calculator and plugged in 32 points on 25 FGA and 10 FTA. That comes out to 54.4%.



It is selective. A player on ISH we have seen TS % used a lot for is Miller, as it is argued he was Barkley-like in efficiency based on TS %. Never mind the difference in volume between the two.

Nash, like some other players, is also hurt by a lot of his impact not showing up on the stat sheet. The efficiency numbers for his teammates with and without him are night and day--but there is no neat stat to capture that on basketballreference. People say he shouldn't have been MVP but if you look at his global impact it is obvious he had MVP-like impact.



Also team success, which is selective as well. It seems fans give a lot of credit to [I]losing[/I] in the finals (except for LeBron) to a much higher level than losing in the conference finals. The problem for Nash is he played for the Phoenix Suns, not the Philadelphia Suns and his losses to the best team often came in the WCF, not the finals. Somehow if he played on the Philadelphia Suns he would be perceived a lot better.[/QUOTE]

No, that's always what 13/20 FTs is. You could have 20 FG attempts thrown in there but for the free throw portion of it, it's contributing those points at a 74 TS%........

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Hardens 9/25 with 5 three pointers is different than Derozens 10/25 with no 3pters....... TS reflects this which it should. What's the problem here?

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14039708]It seems people are really over Steve Nash. Which seems odd to me in this day of "But look at the shooting numbers...." and orating and all that nonsense. Nash gives you 16-19 a game...shoots 52-55%....42-45% from 3...might shoot 89% from the line in a bad year. Guy had a 51/43/95 season scoring 17 a game leading the league in assists winning 55 games and losing to the champs in the WCF. And he was 36. IT wasnt nearly his best season.

We not giving a **** anymore?

Just curious. People used to get on me for not praising him more.[/QUOTE]

I really like Nash I just think he's the weakest player of them in a vacuum, but not by much. Same for Manu.

[QUOTE=tpols;14039733]you put him in a mix of top 20 all time players.

put him in the lower group with payton and kidd and people would still be ****ing with him.[/QUOTE]

I put him in a list with Chris Paul and I think Nash got every pick for worst except one. That wouldn’t have been the case years ago and all that’s happened since is Paul still not winning. I often heard about that lack of winning when I was saying he was Nash level or above at the time....

Just a lot of weird results I’d say based on my years here. People legit thought I’d hated Nash for years for having the same high opinion I have now. But he never gets mentioned anymore.

[QUOTE]No, that's always what 13/20 FTs is. You could have 20 FG attempts thrown in there but for the free throw portion of it, it's contributing those points at a 74 TS%[/QUOTE]

If it is 16/20 FT it becomes 91% and 17/20 97%--so when the 13/20 guy is compared to the 16/20 guy it becomes a large deficit that will be used in debates against the 13/20 guy. Does it make that large a difference (17%) on the court? Missing 3 FT's is equal to missing 1 three pointer.

[QUOTE]Hardens 9/25 with 5 three pointers is different than Derozens 10/25 with no 3pters....... TS reflects this which it should. What's the problem here?[/QUOTE]

16 missed shots out of 25 is never a good thing for a team, especially when a player that off should likely be taking less shots that game. TS masks that.

My point is yes, it should matter. That better free throw shooter is contributing 3 more points in the same situation. That's a big deal to me, even if both are doing a great job of being efficient. Just one is better and should be valued as such.

Missing 14 shots usually is a bad thing, it takes a lot of three pointers and godly FT percentage on 10+ free throw attempts to even making it slightly above average. I don't see a problem here.

Why lump the three data sets into one? It obscures other relevant details. If people care about FT % so much, they can always talk about FT %. Westbrook is playing smarter than ever and it shows in his career-high FG %, but TS % tells us this is his fourth most efficient season because his FT % has slipped since his peak OKC days. If 30 years from now people looked just at his TS % they would miss the change in his game and why that matters for Houston.

I am sharing my personal view. I recognize TS % is the generally accepted metric now so I use that in my posts after using eFG % for a decade.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14039801]I put him in a list with Chris Paul and I think Nash got every pick for worst except one. That wouldn’t have been the case years ago and all that’s happened since is Paul still not winning. I often heard about that lack of winning when I was saying he was Nash level or above at the time....

Just a lot of weird results I’d say based on my years here. People legit thought I’d hated Nash for years for having the same high opinion I have now. But he never gets mentioned anymore.[/QUOTE]

Who are you picking 'worst' in that list you placed Paul and Nash in?

Kg
Chris Paul
David Robinson [B]WORST[/B]
Durant
Dirk - [B]BEST[/B]
Nash





Tmac
Pierce
Vince Carter
Grant Hill
Paul George [B]WORST[/B]
Leonard [B]BEST[/B]





Giannis [B]WORST[/B]
Karl Malone [B]BEST[/B]
James Harden
Isiah Thomas
Doctor J





****Trolls delight****
Kyrie
Pau Gasol [B]BEST[/B]
Pippen
Dumars [B]WORST[/B]
Klay
****Trolls Delight****






Jason Kidd [B]WORST[/B]
Steph Curry
Gary Payton
Wade [B]BEST[/B]
Clyde Drexler










Lillard
Ray Allen
Reggie Miller
Mitch Richmond [B]WORST[/B]
Manu [B]BEST[/B]






Ben Gordon [B]WORST[/B]
Lou Williams [B]BEST[/B]
Barbosa
Jason Terry
John Starks
Jamal Crawford



Magic Johnson [B]BEST[/B]
Tim Duncan
Shaq [B]WORST[/B]
Kobe
Hakeem

He is shooting a horrific 3PT percentage and getting to the free throw line less than his peak OKC years by 3-4 FT attempts.

Why shouldn't this matter? Getting to the line is a great way to score efficiently. Is someone is doing that less than previously, it should and in TS percentage case does get accounted for, along with the horrific 3pt shooting.

His absolute elite 2pt percentage is the only thing saving him. That's worrisome come playoff time, when everything generally gets tougher but especially those 2PT lay ups and fast breaks that are harder to come by.

[QUOTE=Carbine;14039771]No, that's always what 13/20 FTs is. You could have 20 FG attempts thrown in there but for the free throw portion of it, it's contributing those points at a 74 TS%........

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Hardens 9/25 with 5 three pointers is different than Derozens 10/25 with no 3pters....... TS reflects this which it should. What's the problem here?[/QUOTE]

It doesn’t align with his agendas. Everyone who knows two shits about basketball has known TS has been a better indicator of efficiency for over 10 years.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14039610]I suppose it depends on your criteria[/QUOTE]



Good point.



The worst humans and dumbest humans criteria.... basically anybody listed that's currently in the NBA is the worst compared to the previous generation.


Notice that former players aren't angry and running their mouth on a daily basis, complaining how hard life is.


The guys making 10, 20, 30 million a year are the ones crying. While forming super teams to win more easily and play with their butt buddies.


It's not just players today that are weak minded, it's all young people in general.


The brainwashed generation.



[video=youtube;Z1EA2ohrt5Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1EA2ohrt5Q[/video]

[QUOTE]He is shooting a horrific 3PT percentage and getting to the free throw line less than his peak OKC years by 3-4 FT attempts.[/QUOTE]

It should matter--but it isn't the whole story. One of the big questions about him going into the season was how/if he would fit into Houston's offense since he was the antithesis of what Houston does. He has done it by changing his game and playing smarter than he ever did in OKC. He is taking half the threes he did at his peak in 17' and his FG % is up from 42.8% last year to a career-high 47.4% this year. All this nuance is erased by TS %. TS % says Westbrook in 20' is the same as previous versions of Westbrook, which is ridiculous. A real picture would not what I just did and then point out his FT attempts and FT % are down from his peak.

A lot of people chose KG and no one chose KD in the first bracket. And that's fine by me. But I remember posting this thread.
[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?471381-KD-or-KG[/url]
Most people voted for KD. Now, either people are sheeplike and follow each other or people are changing their opinions all the time.

[QUOTE=Akeem34TheDream;14039933]A lot of people chose KG and no one chose KD in the first bracket. And that's fine by me. But I remember posting this thread.
[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?471381-KD-or-KG[/url]
Most people voted for KD. Now, either people are sheeplike and follow each other or people are changing their opinions all the time.[/QUOTE]




The correct answer is that half the NBA fans are leaving because they don't want politics shoved down their throats 24/7.


People that say "they just want players to shut up and dribble"..... I assure you that nobody wants to watch a political movie either. It's not that people want the players to shut up and dribble, it's that they don't care about what somebody else thinks politically. People already have their own political beliefs. When people want to listen to politics, they read the news. If I watch a Tom Cruise movie.... the last thing I want in that movie is for him to talking about Scientology. So in real life when he pushes Scientology, I am not going to listen. Tom Cruise Xenu alien lord believer. Kyrie Irving flat earther. Yeah... people don't care about your fake politics or your made up religion.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14039801]I put him in a list with Chris Paul and I think Nash got every pick for worst except one. That wouldn’t have been the case years ago and all that’s happened since is Paul still not winning. I often heard about that lack of winning when I was saying he was Nash level or above at the time....

Just a lot of weird results I’d say based on my years here. People legit thought I’d hated Nash for years for having the same high opinion I have now. But he never gets mentioned anymore.[/QUOTE]

Paul or Nash have never won anything, so it comes down too who you view as the better player. Steve Nash is a defensive liability to an extreme level, that's my main problem with him. Teams consistently lit up Nash's team in conference finals:

Spurs offensive rating in West finals 2005: 118

Mavs offensive rating in West finals 2006: 114

Lakers offensive rating in West finals 2010: 124

An offense average of 118.6! That's goat level offense in a span of three different years. His only argument is 2007 when his team got suspended but he could of took that series to 7 at least.