SB Nation User Blog: bloodsweatndonuts

Vanity, thy name is "Your Name". I'm sure someone thinks this is cool but I have never been...

bloodsweatndonuts — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 05:37:10 -0000

Vanity, thy name is "Your Name".

I'm sure someone thinks this is cool but I have never been accused of being "someone".

http://www.skymall.com/shopping/detail.htm?pid=102532972&c=#

Assist to Turnover Ratio: Why?

bloodsweatndonuts — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:05:52 -0000

I have always wondered what the value of Assist-to-Turnover Ratio was. More specifically: Why that particular ratio? I understand that it is supposed to be indicative of a player's ability to make good decisions with the ball, but I cannot figure out how this ratio is a good way to measure that. What it basically tells you is how many Assists a player has per Turnover by taking a player's total Assists and dividing it by his total Turnovers. Not that Assists and Turnovers are completely unrelated events, but they hardly have a cause-and-effect relationship like, for example, Field Goals Attempted and Field Goals Made.

I know you all know what these stats are but I think it will help frame the discussion:

Assist: This is credited to a player that passes the ball to another player that makes a field goal. More specifically, the pass has to "directly lead to a basket" or be given to the player attempting the field goal in a position to score. What is the letter of the rule? I've heard two steps and I've heard two dribbles as far as what the offensive player can do after the pass and before taking the shot. Find me a better definition and I'll make you a dope-ass webpin.

Turnover: Basically, if the player has the ball and then loses possession of it to the other team (without scoring or being fouled or the quarter clock running out etc . . .) or if the player's team has the ball and that player commits an infraction (like an offensive foul or 3-second violation) that causes his team to lose possession of the ball, that player is credited with a Turnover.

So how are these two things related?

To the extent that a player can commit a Turnover attempting an Assist either on the pass or a "pass-and-crash" foul or (and this is a stretch) while trying to get into a position so that he can have a better angle at attempting an assist.

So how are these two statistics completely unrelated?

The answer lies in listing the myriad of ways a player can commit a Turnover without attempting an Assist:

-    Dropping a pass (see: Foyle, Adonal)
-    Moving/Illegal Screen
-    Committing a charge while not attempting an Assist
-    Dribbling the ball off his foot
-    Having the ball stolen either on a pass, dribble or just holding it (non Assist situation)
-    3-second violation
-    Stepping out of bounds (see: what GSOM's widely held untruth about MP2 2007/08)
-    Traveling, Carrying, Palming, etc . . . (see: Players, NBA)
-    Double-Dribble
-    Etc . . .

Dependant versus Independent:

The other thing that makes these statistics very different is that Assists are completely dependent on another player's ability to convert a field goal attempt.

BRICK BROS. We eat Assists for breakfast.

Whereas Turnovers are mostly independent of other players to the extent that anything on a basketball court can happen without regard to the positioning/activity of the other 9 players on the floor. I would say that over 90% (observational only) of Turnovers are completely preventable by the individual credited with the Turnover.

Get me the rock!

So why do they measure Assist-to-Turnover Ratio and how does that Ratio tell you something about a player that is useful that could not be garnered by looking at Turnovers and Assists per 40 minutes, side-by-side?

So my questions are:

1. Why does Assist-to-Turnover Ratio exist and why are two, mostly unrelated statistics, displayed as a ratio?

2. What predictive or other value does this statistic have?

3. Wouldn't Assist-to-Steal Ratio make more sense? At least this would measure how many net possessions a player is worth.

Poll

Do you think Assist-to-Turnover Ratio is a useful statistic?

What?!?! You can't combine the TPE with players?

7 votes

The only ratio I like is trading 2 for 1.

7 votes

No.

8 votes

Yes! And it counts!

28 votes

Why aren't you proposing an inplausable trade scenario?

7 votes

57 votes | Poll has closed

Who's Your Favorite Warrior now?

bloodsweatndonuts — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:22:45 -0000

With the Departure of Jason Richardson, Troy Murphy, Mike Dunleavy, Ike Diogu, Zarko Cabarkapa and Adonal Foyle the 2007/08 Warriors roster is going to be full of players that we have little history with as fans.

Mickael Pietrus if he stays, would be the longest tenured Warrior, followed by Andris Biedrins. That's not a whole lot of time to bond.

So now that we have a Baron, Andris, MP and a bunch of guys who have been with this team 2 years or less, who is your favorite Warrior? Not just who is the best, but the guy you really pull for because you connect with him as a fan for whatever reason.

For me it was kind of a process of elimination and the criteria is pretty much a combination of three things:

Game (includes clutch)

Personality

Intangibles: Attitude/Sportsmanship/Back Story

Based on that, I came up with this:

Andris: His game is rebounding, blocking/changing shots, scoring from really close and picking up a lot of ticky-tack fouls and the mouthing the words "C'mon man" to the refs. The thing that I like most about his game is that he knows his limitations and stays within himself. Personality and Attitude-wise, every interview I've heard he's been funny and humble. Perfect guy to root for. My new favorite Warrior.
Matt Barnes. His game is doing a little of everything: scoring, rebounding, defending, handling, hitting the three.And I love the long arms in the passing lanes and he's prven to be clutch. He's also really funny in interviews. There was an interview with Fitz and Brooks where he clowned Baron's beard for a good two minutes. The back story is great too. He'd probably be my favorite if I thought he'd be around beyond next year.
A distant 3-way tie for 3rd for various reasons:

I love almost everything about Stephen Jackson but his obsession with referees hurts the team. It bothers me that he just can't prioritize the team or his teammates above complaining about every call or non-call.

Monta's laziness with the ball handling and his odd personality kind of put me off. But he is probably the most likely to be my next favorite if he can take better care of the ball.

Baron is an amazing basketball player. A pleasure to watch. He is a superstar. I'm glad he's on the Warriors. I just don't like his personality or his attitude. Personality-wise, I don't like the way he is charming and all smiles for TNT/ESPN but is cold and hurries for the FSN post-games. It says a lot that he cares so little about us, the local fans but is willing to turn on the charm for the national audience. The attitude thing is ongoing, but the game in Seattle during the 2005/06 season where he was getting outplayed by Luke Ridnour and Baron responded by shoving him and being a punk. I think this was also after Ridnour was selected for Team USA instead of Baron. That's just weak.

I'm sure everyone has their own reasons for why someone is his or her favorite Warriors player. My question for you now that we've had so much roster turnover is:

Who is your favorite current Warriors' player/players and why? What is your criteria for a player being your favorite?

Poll

Who's Your Favorite Warrior

Andris Biedrins

42 votes

Austin Croshere

6 votes

Baron Davis

45 votes

Monta Ellis

19 votes

Al Harrington

1 votes

Stephen Jackson

16 votes

Kelenna Azubuike

18 votes

Matt Barnes

17 votes

Marco Belinelli

25 votes

189 votes | Poll has closed

Why are the Bucks being praised for their "Courage"?

bloodsweatndonuts — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:05:06 -0000

Disclaimer #1: I know this was somewhat discussed DJ Fuzzylogic's Yi post: The Global Economic Logic to Yi's NBA Destination, but I wanted to focus on how the Bucks have seemingly seized the moral high ground in this debate. By that reasoning I don't think it's a "repost" of the same topic, rather a focused discussion of one facet of a larger issue. Also, way way too long for a comment.

Anyhow . . .

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/marty_burns/07/05/yi.bucks/1.html

Some around the league, in fact, are applauding Harris for not being cowed by the demands of an agent, while acknowledging that he might have taken a bit of a risk. . .

"They did the right thing," Williams added. "If he was really the guy they wanted, they should be applauded. They went with their gut and said, 'He's the guy and we'll teach him to like German food and bratwurst and 10-degree weather in January.' Yes, I would definitely respect them for what they did."

It's interesting how the Bucks are being praised for trying to "preserve the integrity of the system". This is the same system that a lot of people criticize for preventing poor, urban 18-year-olds from going into the NBA. Which, and I'm the first one to agree that everything in America has an element of racism involved (hooray for blanket statements that will distract from the main point of the post), is primarily about not paying for a population of players that will sit on the bench for a year. Instead they get to, as a group and with no competitive advantage to any team, pay for a more polished product that is more likely to produce sooner yet remain under team contractual control during more productive years (19-23 vs 18-22). That's pretty much institutional collusion. In other words, it benefits the wealthy owners.

This is not a moral issue, at least not the type of moral issue that the media and NBA team execs are making it out to be. It's about business and leverage. Yi and his "handlers" (a creepy term the media has adopted for this story) have some right now, albeit not a lot, and they are using it. As they should.

This is not a benevolent system, these owners are very very rich men who belong to a very exclusive investment club. They pay athletes millions of dollars because they make 100s of millions of dollars in return. The also continuously collude to make the system benefit that end. When the agents/players find a way to game the system, the owners (NBA/Stern) counter by changing the system: Salary Cap, Luxury Tax, Bird Rule, Arenas Rule etc . . . All designed to take leverage away from the players. Sound like any other institution you've been a part of? Hint: The Bucks owner, Herb Kohl, is a U.S. Senator.

So why are the Bucks, valued at $260M, being applauded for their moral fortitude?

Two reasons:

1. Spin. The Bucks want to paint this as a moral issue. The good guys trying to preserve order vs. the bad guys who want to upset the balance of this fair and egalitarian draft system. This is important because the Bucks have to sell this draft decision to its season ticket holders and the rest of their fan base.

What makes this spin job so easy?

2. The institutionalized morality of law. I think a lot of the NBA execs, not to mention most of the fans an the media, truly believe that, because the Bucks hold Yi's draft rights, they hold the moral high-ground. This is part of living in a 1st world society. We are taught to believe that: Rule = Good, Not Following the Rule = Bad. This is so ingrained in our consciousness that our first reaction is to side with the people following the rules because, after all, that's what good citizens do. So when we hear about Yi, telling the NBA that he's not going to follow the rules, our probable first reaction is "who the hell does this guy think he is? Why is he so special?". The same thing happened with the when T.O. wanted to renegotiate up his contract with the Eagles (why is Nellie getting the opposite reaction?). The Bucks and the NBA have this mindset on their side an it is a huge PR advantage.

All of this spin benefits the Bucks by applying more pressure on the Yi camp by painting him as a villain. That can not be helping his marketability. Also, the Bucks have now crafted a PR safety net for themselves if the Yi gamble doesn't pay off. Almost like "bad GM insurance" (see Twardzik, Dave). So now the worst case scenario is the Bucks lose Yi and come out looking like victims of an evil plot of questionable legality. Brilliant.

Disclaimer #2: Sorry for such a serious post. Blame the Pacers. If it weren't for them I'd still be spending all of my GSOM time writing "why Dunleavy is an overrated tool" posts (seriously, he's not a good passer!). Also, I know we're supposed to stay away from politics because this is a basketball (aka fun) blog, but this "basketball" issue is really about a complex political power struggle between a lot of wealthy parties (Bucks, China, Fegan, The NBA) trying to be spun as a black and white ethical issue. By that reasoning, I think this post is 95% justified/appropriate.

*********************************************************

I gave this diary a plug on Ballhype. Hype it up!

- Atma Brother #1

Ballhype - Why are the Bucks being praised for their "Courage"?

Poll

Agree?

Totally

4 votes

Yes

3 votes

Uh huh

2 votes

Yep

0 votes

9 votes | Poll has closed

Puttin' some mustard on Seattle. P.J. to be new coach.

bloodsweatndonuts — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:22:15 -0000

Retread in Seattle.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/warriors/ci_6296946

The Seattle SuperSonics have scheduled a Thursday news conference amid reports that the team has hired P.J. Carlesimo as its new coach.

Team officials refused to comment Tuesday on a report that first appeared on the San Antonio Express-News Web site, which said Carlesimo had been chosen by Sonics ownership.

Good god. I really am not looking forward to hearing his grating voice on the sidelines. This is something that can not and will not work. He can never have the respect of an NBA locker room.

Does he deserve a second chance? My initial reaction is yes, it's not his fault he got choked. But my second reaction is that he should have known what he was dealing with in Spree and that his lack of respect for his star player shows that he was unaware of the sociology of the NBA despite coaching in Portland prior to that.

I'm sure he's learned and I'm sure he's mellowed, but he's always going to be kind of a joke based on what happened to him. We'll see . . .

Pacers.com apologist in denial

bloodsweatndonuts — Sat, 05 May 2007 01:30:03 -0000

Weird article. Just basically telling Pacers fans not to be jealous. That's sad.
The only point the article tries to make is that the Warriors didn't benefit as much as we think they did from the trade. Which is dead wrong, especially considering the chemistry and, not coincidentally, the defensive intensity it helped solidify.

Strangely, he also doesn't mention DunMurpy or the massive amount of money they took on. He doesn't even try to go to the "Diogu is the real key to this trade" card. Why do they have to pee on our parade?

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/web_070504.html?rss=true

Without question, Stephen Jackson has been a major contributor. He also was ejected twice (sound familiar?) during the Dallas series - and fined heavily by Coach Don Nelson. Al Harrington, however, hasn't adapted well to being moved to center (sound familiar?) and has slipped to the fringe of the rotation. Sarunas Jasikevicius and Josh Powell rarely shed their warmups.

The fact is, the Pacers probably wouldn't have made the playoffs had they kept the roster intact. Donnie Walsh and Larry Bird accurately identified a dysfunctional team that was teetering on the brink of total collapse and acted to make a major change. If anything, the trade delayed the inevitable because it provided the new energy that led to the only real surge of the season in late January and early February.

Here's a bonus feature on the front page called "Dunleavy, A Breath of Fresh Air".
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/0607_review_dunleavy.html

Reasons Dunleavy is unlikely to go to Clippers

bloodsweatndonuts — Fri, 29 Dec 2006 16:28:18 -0000

Or at least what the L.A. Times Clipper beat writer thinks would be prohibitive factors. The guy didn't mention the base-year issue though, which is kind of big . . . still an interesting perspective.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/clippers/la-spw-clippersqa28dec29,1,7489790.story?coll= la-headlines-sports-nba-clippe&ctrack=1&cset=true

Q: Why don't the Clippers immediately make the trade for Mike Dunleavy Jr.? He handles the ball well, has the outside shot, and has a high basketball IQ. Don Nelson erred early in the season by publicly humiliating him, thereby throwing fuel on the fire with the home crowd up there. His overall stats per minute have been excellent.

Jim Babbitz

A: Well, it's not that simple. There are salary-cap issues because Mike Jr. has a higher salary than Corey Maggette, who the Clippers need to trade because of Maggette's poor relationship with Mike Sr. The younger Dunleavy's contract could put the Clippers into the luxury-tax threshold, and owner Donald T. Sterling would rather not pay the tax. Also, some in the organization think it would be a bad idea for Mike Jr. to play for his father. Other players could be uncomfortable talking freely about the coach if his son was on the team. And Mike Jr. could be in a bad position if his teammates do not trust him because of his relationship with the coach. That could lead to chemistry problems, which wouldn't be a good thing for the Clippers. And if Mike Jr. played poorly, Mike Sr. could take a lot of heat for bringing in his son.

Be careful what you wish for Jim Babbitz!!

Salaries:

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/la_clippers.htm

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/golden_state.htm

Weekly Don Nelson Interview

bloodsweatndonuts — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:39 -0000

Here is a link to the Don Nelson show on KNBR (every Thursday). It's better than the average coach's show in that Nelson tends to be very candid.
In this last installment he talks about the fact that he won't play Foyle because Adonal refuses to do what the coach asks him to do and still (how many years have we been hearing this for?) wants to prove to the coach that he can score.

A quality sports radio program in a sea of utter garbage.

http://media.knbr.com/knbr/nelson.mp3

Buy Out Dunleavy's Contract Instead of Foyle's

bloodsweatndonuts — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 06:25:16 -0000

He is a below average NBA starter making a ton of money that cripples the Wariors financial flexibility.

He does a lot of things OK but nothing particularly well on a consistant basis. He's versitile but not skilled enough to make that versitility an advantage. It's like having a bunch of average to below average players rolled into one guy. Great!

I would buy him out instead of Foyle. At least Adonal does 3 things well: Block shots, defend the post and rebound. By "well", I mean he does them better than most NBA players (the rebounding is probably just "above average").

What does Mike D. do better than most NBA players?

Does flopping count?

Best and Worst Warriors Theme Songs

bloodsweatndonuts — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:46:28 -0000

Hearing the new Warriors theme song on the radio during the preseason made me think of two things:

That guy's voice sounds a lot like the guy from "Snap" in 'I've Got The Power': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMW0hJIrnvs&mode=related&search=
How important the theme songs are because we end up hearing them over and over and over on the radio and TV all season long. Most eventually fade into the dark recesses of our subconscious, some become classics, while others were simply unfortunate results of bad judgment (for other examples of this see: "Warriors Basketball, Last 12 Years").

After all those years (88-89 to present) I only remember a few. I'm guessing at the titles.

The Good:

- The "We Came to Play" song from around 89-90. It had the TV commercial with the Warriors going to a playground surrounded by a chain-link fence. I think it was in black and white. I always thought people would freak out and run screaming if they we're playing pick-up and Manute Bol rolled up and said "I got next".

The Bad:
"Don't Stop the Noise". That was the slogan around 90-91-92. Triggers good feelings because of the time, but the more I remember of the song, the more I remember that it was pretty awful. It would go along with this very commercial-like anthem and suddenly takes a sharp left turn into this weak rap about Chris and Tim and 'In walks the Don, Don't Stop The Noise!'. Blech. The rap was Like Bobby Brown's rap in 'Take Control' from Ghostbusters II: http://www.uppercutmusic.com/artist_b/bobby_brown_lyrics/on_our_own_lyrics.html

The Unfortunate:

- "Wo Wo Wo Wo Warriors". It was just a guy saying that over and over again. It lasted a whole season. That would get stuck in my head. I think that was one of the PJ years too so it was like adding insult to injury (or at least adding "Wo Wo Wo Wo" to Warriors).

I can't really think of any more but I do have "Wo Wo Wo Wo Warriors" droning on over and over in my head now.

Which ones do you guys hate/like from years past?