Camby for a 2nd round pick? They couldnt get a better deal than that?
Printable View
Camby for a 2nd round pick? They couldnt get a better deal than that?
[QUOTE=stephanieg]07-08 Denver Nuggets had a defensive efficiency of 106.3, good for 10th in the league. So you're wrong. Of course, without Camby that may slip a little.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, Denver is one of those teams that are just nothing but stats.
I've watched them a few times this year including the playoffs and their inability to get back on transition D, defend pick and rolls, and protect the paint makes them a horrible defensive team. No efficiency rating can describe what I observed with my own eyes.
[QUOTE=Posterize246]Denver gave up 107 ppg...2nd last in the league.[/QUOTE]
Do you know what defensive efficiency rating means? It's what teams give up per 100 possessions. Some teams have more possessions than others due to the pace they play. Some teams have very few possessions because they play slower (Detroit, San Antonio), others have a lot because they play fast (Phoenix, Golden State). Denver plays at a very fast pace. Defensive efficiency lets you compare the defensive ability of teams that play at different paces.
This also works for other things like scoring and rebounding. Just because a team scores a lot of points or grabs a lot of rebounds in total doesn't mean they're actually good at that. You have to look at how they do it per possession and then compare it to other teams.
It's also nice because the efficiency differential (offensive - defensive) is VERY useful historically for predicting playoff series.
[QUOTE=bagelred]I'm being dead serious now.
Someone explain to me how the Nuggets benefit by trading the best rebounder in basketball who has a reasonable contract for nothing.
Is there something I'm not aware of? I"m lost......[/QUOTE]
The Nugs have 0 PF/C depth, and their starters are both injury prone.
Martin
Nene
with hunter and I guess Kleiza as only reserves
[QUOTE=stephanieg]Do you know what defensive efficiency rating means? It's what teams give up per 100 possessions. Some teams have more possessions than others due to the pace they play. Some teams have very few possessions because they play slower (Detroit, San Antonio), others have a lot because they play fast (Phoenix, Golden State). Denver plays at a very fast pace. Defensive efficiency lets you compare the defensive ability of teams that play at different paces.
This also works for other things like scoring and rebounding. Just because a team scores a lot of points or grabs a lot of rebounds in total doesn't mean they're actually good at that. You have to look at how they do it per possession and then compare it to other teams.
It's also nice because the efficiency differential (offensive - defensive) is VERY useful historically for predicting playoff series.[/QUOTE]
well then the nuggets just exposed whatever forumla the DER uses as being horribly flawed. my guess is that it gives way too much weight to steals, since the nuggets do get a lot of those.
the nuggets are IN NO WAY the 10th best defensive team in the league, whatever that DER formula is saying. that formula is flawed.
[QUOTE=Posterize246]Would you be happier with Camby or would you have rather signed Okafor?[/QUOTE]
[B]Were just happy that Randolph aint on his way over to Clipper Nation :lol [/B]
[QUOTE=ZeN][B]Were just happy that Randolph aint on his way over to Clipper Nation :lol [/B][/QUOTE]
[SIZE="6"]
WAAAAAAAAAALSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/SIZE]
SO what does their depth chart look right now (denver)?
[QUOTE=final.wrath]well then the nuggets just exposed whatever forumla the DER uses as being horribly flawed. my guess is that it gives way too much weight to steals, since the nuggets do get a lot of those.
the nuggets are IN NO WAY the 10th best defensive team in the league, whatever that DER formula is saying. that formula is flawed.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't weight anything. It's simply objective reality. Denver, per 100 possessions, gives up x amount of points. This number is 10th in the league.
[QUOTE=stephanieg]It doesn't weight anything. It's simply objective reality. Denver, per 100 possessions, gives up x amount of points. This number is 10th in the league.[/QUOTE]
Show me a link where you got your data from.
[QUOTE=stephanieg]It doesn't weight anything. It's simply objective reality. Denver, per 100 possessions, gives up x amount of points. This number is 10th in the league.[/QUOTE]
I'm not much into formulas or anything. I think they're a little overrated. All I know is that Denver can get lazy on defense, doesn't get back, and were exposed completely in the 1st round. I don't really care how many possessions there are. They can't D up.
its not an ideal fit, nor does it make the Clippers championship contenders, but it does make them better and all they had to do was give up a second round pick and take on a contract that only has 2 more years at 10M a piece.
no its not a bombshell or a blockbuster that launches the CLippers into the stratosphere, but when you consider the long term ramifications of some of the other blunders out there waiting to be made by the Clippers, a la signing guys like Smith or Deng to 5 or 6 year deals, this really was the most sensible way for teh Clippers to get a little bit better now, without doing something they'll regret in the long term.
anyone who is panning this trade needs to realize that the bottom line is that the Clippers are now better than they were yesterday, and they gave up practically nothing to make it happen. so all in all, its a good trade
[QUOTE=ElPigto]Show me a link where you got your data from.[/QUOTE]
Its most likely true but doesnt account for fg% or efg%. Hell Detroit allows more points per 100 possessions but they also force there opponents to shoot a lot worse.
[QUOTE=statman32]Its most likely true but doesnt account for fg% or efg%. Hell Detroit allows more points per 100 possessions but they also force there opponents to shoot a lot worse.[/QUOTE]
I'm not doubting it's validity, I was interested to see where teams ranked.
[QUOTE]But seriously, I don't see why people are acting like the Clippers lost,[/QUOTE]I don't think the clippers lost, the price was certainly right.. the problem is they had 14 mill or so in cap space to really do something that would fill a spot or two that needed work..
instead they get an aging bigman they didn't need because they have a guy like kaman