- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
The stats I saw you presented were for All-Stars only.
Should Ayton be Traded?
- Thread starter Hoop Head
- Start date
The stats I saw you presented were for All-Stars only.
I will see if I can find more specific numbers. Although, All-Stars are depended on more and I doubt the average NBA player is going to be that much different. There is certainly nothing out there that says a guy who plays 58 to 67 games is considered less "durable" than the average NBA player unless you are aware of anything.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
I'm not making any argument. I wanted to see the information to support what you said.
Which I did. You and Chap want to complain and claim otherwise but I clearly backed it up by games played. Afterwards you want to dig further, that's on you then to provide evidence as to why they missed games. As I stated over and over, good players don't see 20+ healthy scratches a year. If a player misses more than 20% of the season, they aren't durable or they aren't that valuable to a teams success. Now if you want to say that's not true, tell me why. Present the argument. I've been reasonable and rational. All you and Chap done is split hairs since I made my initial statement that no one beyond our top 5 has proven themselves to be durable or quality contributors on a consistent basis. Less than 80% is not consistent.
You're arguing to argue now and it's childish.
Chaplin
Better off silent
You didn't though. You posted a couple numbers as if that is the end all and be all. If a guy is in the GLeague for 20 games in a season, then they can ONLY play 62 games total. And again, you're not even including DNPs. These are young players that didn't get consistent minutes in the beginnings of their careers. I'm not sure why that makes them not durable in your eyes.
Ok, then look up their G-League totals and tell me if that makes them durable. Key contributors don't get sent down for long stretches right? Can we agree on that? So either they aren't durable or haven't been key contributors.
You're claiming my information isn't enough. With zero data to prove it. Simply shaking your head and saying "Nuh-uh'. Its not my fault you're ignoring the evidence I provided. Now you're claiming they are without proving it, so prove it. You're now making a claim so the onus of proof has shifted.
Chaplin
Better off silent
But wait, the conversation hasn't been if they were key contributors in their early career. That's moving the goalposts. The discussion was whether these guys were durable. That's different.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
I think it's about time to get back to the original topic:
"Should Ayton be Traded?"
"Should Ayton be Traded?"
Chaplin
Better off silent
Why? It's the offseason and it's a conversation that (so far) hasn't degenerated into name calling.
Holy @&$-
That's what started all this! I said no one beyond our top 5 has proven themselves in the league and can't be called durable. I'd like to have Payne still because we know what we were getting from him, he could step up and contribute when called upon. His numbers as a starter prove that. I'd like to have him still and said that no one beyond our top 5 can be called durable and we don't know what we'll get from them. You threw a fit about the durable part when quality contributions when called upon has always been a part of my initial point.
Chaplin
Better off silent
You said nobody on our team was durable, I asked what knowledge you had about the new guys that would cause you to have that opinion. You gave some numbers with no context and that's what we were discussing.
But since you don't want to have a good faith conversation, then fine. We're done. Should Ayton be traded?
You didn't. You provided no comparison to the rest of the league to backup your claim the bench isn't durable. That's not a logical argument. You provided no comparative baseline to the rest of the league to even determine that. Now you are saying if a player misses 20% of the games in a season (16 games) and plays in only 66 games they are not durable or valuable. So, If a player plays in 66 games they are not that valuable to a teams success?
Seriously?!
I wasn't even saying you were wrong by the way. The point I was making is you threw stuff out there with no context or baseline. That was it.
This isn't perfect because again, I can't account for every scenario and there is no perfect way to look at this. However, I exported the data and looked at the average games played by NBA players last season from here: https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023_totals.html. The average games played were as follows:
At least 20 GP: Average 53
At least 30 GP: Average 58
So it appears that Yuta and Diopp are not any less durable than other players unless you can think of another way for me to do this.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
I suggest we let it go and move on. The durability comparison you provided was for All-Stars.
It's simply not worth arguing about.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
I got them from multiple links. Why wouldn't they be regular season? Here is one I still have up. When I get off my calls I will try and find the articles I got them from.
I read and saw what you posted for NBA stars and All-Stars. The game's played stats were for them.
The Instagram is no longer showing up.
Incorrect. I just provided the REGULAR SEASON averages from the data exported from the site linked. Evidently you didn't read the post or look at the link or the data from the link. You are welcome to do that math from that site. It wasn't difficult and the data is there. I tried to use ESPN but there site is more difficult to export the data.
Please re-read my last post. You can easily get the averages based on data exported here: https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2023_totals.html.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
Were the stats for All-Stars. How hard is it to repost a link?
How hard is it to read my last post??!?! The link is there? I exported the data from that link and calculated the regular season averages and gave my criteria. I have no clue what you are missing?
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
Yes, you added edited the post and added the link. It was not there when you first posted it.
Btw, I'm not going to wade through those stats to try to prove your point. Please show the math.
Show what math? You export the data, average Games played via a formula and magic. I outlined my criteria. You don't have to wade through any stats. You think I have time to manually do this? The modern marvel of spreadsheet formulas is a time saver. I am open to changing the criteria if you feel there is a better way to calculate.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
I don't know how accurate that is which is why I did it myself. Plus, like you said that was focused on all-stars (not that it appeared to matter much).
Chaplin
Better off silent
You're not following the conversation, so you should probably cease responding about it until you at least understand what is being discussed.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
It was averaged games played by All-Stars in the 2022-23 season.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 117,960
- Reaction score
- 58,203
Thanks for a good chuckle.
So that doesn't make sense, you're disqualifying anyone who played less than 30 games from the data? See how that doesn't add up? Want to talk about cherry picking.
There's no perfect measure. I agree on that. I provided data backing up my point, if you don't like it, fine, provide your own. Clearly I take issue with what you're supplying but remember, this all started because @Chaplin and you decided to say it wasn't fair to say they aren't durable when you can't provide any proof they are. So we'll have to agree to disagree.
