Running With The Bulls Episode #114

[Bullsman24]

well if he takes more shots to be a higher volume scorer, all the gordon haters are gonna be all over his case.

plus toney had dr. j and moses malone to make him the third option, so he wasn't double teamed on every play like ben. plus, he has lower averages in everything

 

[houheffna]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Toney was in Philly before Malone. Toney was a great player at his best. Who the hell told you Ben gets doubled on every play? Sometimes I don't know where you guys get this stuff from...

Gordon is not on the same level as Toney, their games are similar but Toney was better. Kind of like Kobe and Michael Jordan.

 

[??? ??????]

TheStig wrote:

??? ?????? wrote:

houheffna wrote:

No that was PO3 and he didn't say better, he said more efficient. Which BG is because Melo is more of a volume scorer.

http://www.bullspodcasters.com/forums?func=view&catid=5&id=19045&limit=15&start=15


unless he has you on legal retainer....he said "better", YOU said "efficient". He said "better" and tried to use stats to prove it. Too much.


But what I say is madness?

I do have a witness online...

http://www.bizofbasketball.com/?option=com_content&view=article&id=325&Itemid=1

Gordon was a better scorer last year. Carmelo Anthony's volume (2.1 PPG greater) isn't enough to make up for the efficiency trade off going from Gordon to Melo.

I don't care if Carmelo is a ten times more skilled offensive player. Gordon still did a better job of putting the ball in the hoop than Carmelo did.

And what does that say if Carmelo is a more talented, more skilled player than Gordon but not producing as good of offensive results?

Granted Carmelo was much better in the playoffs, but Gordon was great in the playoffs as well.

How can BG be the better offensive player if the only advantage he has is scoring efficiency? Wouldn't that just make him the more efficient scorer?

Ben Gordon's the better scorer, because the volume increase (just 2.1 more PPG for Carmelo) isn't enough to warrant the efficieny decrease (4.1 TS%).

This of course is just for this past season when Carmelo was averaging something like 22.8 PPG on 53.2 TS%. In past years, Carmelo was scoring around 28 PPG on 56 TS%, which in that case, he is a no brainer better scorer than Gordon.

It's kind of interesting that Denver had such a good year with Carmelo having such a poor year.

 

[houheffna]

According to the argument you use, Artis Gilmore is the greatest scorer ever.

1. Michael Jordan is the 71st best scorer ever. Behind Eddy Curry by the way.
2. Why have love for Shaquille when Jeff Ruland could score at a more efficient level.
3. Jordan would have been better off offensively with Tracy Murray and Mo Williams than
Scottie Pippen...

I can go on and on using what you used to gauge who the better scorers are.

I like reality, I like watching the games.

 

[??? ??????]

houheffna wrote:

According to the argument you use, Artis Gilmore is the greatest scorer ever.

1. Michael Jordan is the 71st best scorer ever. Behind Eddy Curry by the way.
2. Why have love for Shaquille when Jeff Ruland could score at a more efficient level.
3. Jordan would have been better off offensively with Tracy Murray and Mo Williams than
Scottie Pippen...

I can go on and on using what you used to gauge who the better scorers are.

I like reality, I like watching the games.

You have to put stats in context, which you seem unable to do.

Ben Gordon and Carmelo Anthony are both first options on their team. Play similar minutes. Anthony only averages 2 points more than Gordon. There is not a lot of difference between the amount of points they scored. With that, you begin to look at their efficiency, and Ben Gordon's was much better.

1. Michael Jordan vs. Eddy Curry. Michael Jordan in his best efficiency/volume season averaged 32.5 PPG on 61.4 TS%. Eddy Curry did 19.5 PPG on 60.3 TS%. Michael Jordan not only has a much higher volume, but also a higher efficiency.

2. Shaquille O'neal in his best efficiency/volume season averaged 29.3 PPG on 60.5 TS%. Jeff Ruland's was 22.2 PPG on 63.3 TS%. The 7.1 PPG difference seems well worth the efficiency trade off. Shaq also had a much higher eFG% and FG% than Ruland. Shaq, from the field, was a much more dominating player than Ruland, and doing his field scoring much more efficiently than Ruland. Shaq just had that little free throw thing dragging down his efficiency.

This is not the case with Ben Gordon vs. Carmelo Anthony, where Gordon runs the gambit with a higher FG%, 3PT%, FT%, eFG%, and TS%.

3. This is just dumb in regards to your argument. Pippen had a 53.6 TS%. Murray had a moderately better TS% with 53.9, and Mo Williams 53.7%. Why would you choose someone with practically the same scoring efficiency to make your little argument?

And any Bulls fan should know that scoring was only part of the reaon why Pippen was such a good fit on the Bulls. His great rebounding for a small forward, great point guard skills, and All NBA Defense also made Pippen valuable to the Bulls.

Also, Pippen has a higher career scoring average, while having basically the same scoring efficiency...so I'd say Pippen is betteer myself. Again, don't really see why you would include that for your little argument.

 

[houheffna]

I don't see the statistical reasoning behind your dumb argument either.

I watch the games, you wait until the game is over for the statsheet printouts. If you need stats to tell you who the better scorer is...are you blind?

Maybe that's it, you are reading braille stats...gotta be. Well if you could see them play, Carmelo is a better scorer than Gordon, point blank.

 

[??? ??????]

houheffna wrote:

I don't see the statistical reasoning behind your dumb argument either.

I watch the games, you wait until the game is over for the statsheet printouts. If you need stats to tell you who the better scorer is...are you blind?

Maybe that's it, you are reading braille stats...gotta be. Well if you could see them play, Carmelo is a better scorer than Gordon, point blank.

So you watch a game. You don't have any inkling of the stats, the announcers don't mention it. Both guys take the same number of shots, same number of free throws. One player scores 24 points, the other 26 points. You assess the game, and think the first player was the better scorer. But in reality, the second player ended up doing better.

All the stats are, are the results of what happen on the court.

Typically the better results you have, the better you are at something.

 

[houheffna]

Stats can be skewed to mean different things, there is this thing called "statistical integrity" in the business world. In other words, you should not use stats to show a different conclusion than reality presents. Carmelo is one of the top players in the league. And a fantastic scorer. Interpreting the stats to show anything other than what they represent, efficiency is wrong. Carmelo is a better scorer than Gordon. No matter what stats you throw up, that is the way it is.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

For the stats lovers:

04-05: Gordon 15,1 ; Carmelo 20,8
05-06: Gordon 16,9 ; Carmelo 26,5
06-07: Gordon 21,4 ; Carmelo 28,9
07-08: Gordon 18,6 ; Carmelo 25,7
08-09: Gordon 20,7 ; Carmelo 22,8

Career: Gordon 18,5 ; Carmelo 24,2

So Carmelo really seems to be the better scorer

Btw: Great show as always Kush!