The Truth About Carmelo Anthony

[Shawn2timer]

Eddie Curry
Corey Maggette
JR Smith
Raja Bell
Theo Ratliff
Antonio Daniels
Shane Battier
Mike Miller
David Lee

These guys all have higher TS% then Melo. Actually with the exception of Battier and Delambert they all have higher TS% percentages than Michael Jordan

Andre Miller
Peja Stojakovich
[B]Corey Maggette
Brad Miller
Mike Bibby[/B]

These guys all have higher OWS than Carmelo. Also higher than Dwight Howard and Deron Williams.

David Lee
Peja Stojakovich
Mike Miller
Raja Bell
Brad Miller
Brendan Haywood
Shane Battier
Antonio Daniels
[B]Corey Maggette[/B]

These guys all have ahigher ORtg than Melo. Most of them are higher than Deron Williams, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Dwight Howard. For reference Cedric Maxwell, Sidney Moncrief, Kiki and Steve Nash all have higher ORtg than Michael Jordan.

Since some of these names appear again and again the following conclusions must be correct.

1. Correy Maggette is one of the Greates Scorers of All-Time. If not the Greatest,

2. Not far below him are David Lee, Mike Miller, Brad Miller, Antonio Daniels, Shane Battier, and Raja Bell

3. Deron Williams, Dwight Howard, and Carmelo Anthony are worse in all 3 categories than these guys therefore. They are not as good at scoring.

Action to be taken: Our highest paid go to scorer, especially in cruch time, that will lead us to the promised land of a Championship should be: Corey Magette. If we believe that at 32 Corey Maggette may be a bit too old then either go after someone who models their game after him (as I am sure so many young players coming up have) or trade Melo for David Lee.

These advanced statistics really help in determining how much better one player is than another. Now that I am free of subjectivity. There I was thinking that Miller, Miller, Battier, Bell and Lee were just good glue guys and role players. Boy was I mistaken. I feel so relieved.

It only took 12 pages to get a decent counter argument

[Hustla23]

Eddie Curry
Corey Maggette
JR Smith
Raja Bell
Theo Ratliff
Antonio Daniels
Shane Battier
Mike Miller
David Lee

These guys all have higher TS% then Melo. Actually with the exception of Battier and Delambert they all have higher TS% percentages than Michael Jordan

Andre Miller
Peja Stojakovich
[B]Corey Maggette
Brad Miller
Mike Bibby[/B]

These guys all have higher OWS than Carmelo. Also higher than Dwight Howard and Deron Williams.

David Lee
Peja Stojakovich
Mike Miller
Raja Bell
Brad Miller
Brendan Haywood
Shane Battier
Antonio Daniels
[B]Corey Maggette[/B]

These guys all have ahigher ORtg than Melo. Most of them are higher than Deron Williams, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Dwight Howard. For reference Cedric Maxwell, Sidney Moncrief, Kiki and Steve Nash all have higher ORtg than Michael Jordan.

Since some of these names appear again and again the following conclusions must be correct.

1. Correy Maggette is one of the Greates Scorers of All-Time. If not the Greatest,

2. Not far below him are David Lee, Mike Miller, Brad Miller, Antonio Daniels, Shane Battier, and Raja Bell

3. Deron Williams, Dwight Howard, and Carmelo Anthony are worse in all 3 categories than these guys therefore. They are not as good at scoring.

Action to be taken: Our highest paid go to scorer, especially in cruch time, that will lead us to the promised land of a Championship should be: Corey Magette. If we believe that at 32 Corey Maggette may be a bit too old then either go after someone who models their game after him (as I am sure so many young players coming up have) or trade Melo for David Lee.

These advanced statistics really help in determining how much better one player is than another. Now that I am free of subjectivity. There I was thinking that Miller, Miller, Battier, Bell and Lee were just good glue guys and role players. Boy was I mistaken. I feel so relieved.

You do realize that rate stats like ORtg and TS% regress with an increase in USG%, right?

So comparing all these low USG players to high USG ones is null.

That's the entire premise of OWS.

Speaking of OWS:

Um, Deron Williams had a peak OWS of 8.9. So ALL of those players you listed except for Peja who was a beast in his prime, did not have a higher peak season than Deron. If we're going to pass things off as fact, let's make sure they're actually fact, shall we?

Oh, fun fact. MJ had the highest OWS out of anyone in history. I guess since this one advanced stat coincided with our preconceived notion, it must be legit, right?

[Hustla23]

It only took 12 pages to get a decent counter argument

I have to say I at least appreciate the attempt at some intelligent discussion.

"HahA STAT geekz suk a dik. WATCH wid UR Eyez" gets old pretty fast.

[Shawn2timer]

Uh, so what are you going to back up subjective opinions with? More subjective opinions? I would think objective FACTS would take precedence over subjective opinions.

Okay, stats don't tell the whole story. That doesn't mean we should just abandon them altogether. If that's the case, why don't we just stop keeping box scores and never mention any numbers to begin with. Who cares if someone scores 20 points a game? He looked ugly doing it. That means he sucks.

You have a confused understanding of statistics if that's what your argument is. Stats don't "try to represent" something. They merely quantify observable phenomena. They are used, however, to support ideas and arguments. And they're legitimate because they are irrefutable objective pieces of KEY WORD: evidence.

If you don't agree with a certain point, then find facts to counter that point. Don't just question the credibility of the evidence that's presented. It just makes a person look ignorant.

And I have no idea who that guy is that you quoted but what he said is obviously stupid. Don't ascribe random people that you perceive to be stupid to the rest of the people who are actually competent in the field. That's bad logic.

Stats actually do a lot more than "merely quantify observational data" In fact it is pretty weak in that on its own its purely descriptive. It can't be used for inferences or to determine causality.

As for the bold, they are very much refutable, if not the stat itself then the formula behind deriving that stat or simply its relevance in making an argument

[Shawn2timer]

I have to say I at least appreciate the attempt at some intelligent discussion.

"HahA STAT geekz suk a dik. WATCH wid UR Eyez" gets old pretty fast.

Haha very true

[knicks=love]

great thread rosh

[triple5real]

Completely disregarding stats is just as stupid as using them as the end-all be-all.

I'd like to think I'm further on the side of 'watching the games is more valuable than efficiency stats' but you can't just throw the stats out the window.

And when you present a flawed argument using stats, the stats will always appear flawed.

Nobody would take Tyson Chandler's all-time efficiency last season as him being a better offensive player than a guy like Kobe. Thats why you use stats in context.

I personally think the stats posted in the OP, comparing Melo to similar offensive star talents with similar roles on their respective teams and similar statures in the league was pretty telling. I don't think saying , 'Hey Theo Ratliff who took the amount of shots in a season that Melo did in 1 game has a higher TS%, look how flawed those stats are!!' really does anything to discredit the stats.

Nobody once said you could just look at a stat sheet and get all your answers, that would be stupid and that would tell us Theo Ratliff is better offensive player than Melo which is ludicrous. But when you see things from watching his game and the stats back it up it becomes apparent where the problem lies. Also, you should know that comparing certain players using certain stats is going to skew the results. Thats why you use them in reasonable context and compare similar player with similar roles.

There must be a reason the most complete offensive player doesn't win like less complete offensive players with similar offensive roles and scoring loads do. It looks to me like its because he can't translate that complete game into an efficient game...

Melo fans gotta stop getting so butt hurt. Melo has got flaws in his game, you can either choose to note it with your own eyes or let that stats point it out for you, but its obviously there.

So with that statement your saying it doesn't matter, who the teammates are, who the coach is, if there are injuries, if a proper system is in place...well yes your right so I guess Melo IS flawed and can't translate just like Deron Williams, Derick Rose, Russell WestBrook, Kevin Durant, and Dwight Howard...cool at least he in elite company lol

[Knicks Fire Dog]

Think of it in $$$$. It ain't about what you earn its about what you keep.

You could make TONS of dough, more than anyone else in the 'league', have more revenue streams and more sources of income than anyone else.

But you spend it like a dumbass, make crappy investments, buy expensive brand name crap, and save next to nothing. Does that make you the richest guy around? You have the most diverse sources of income, yet can't turn it into a fortune? Can't seem to get any bang for your buck?

Yet that guy down the road may only have 1 or 2 sources of income as opposed to the 6 or 7, yet hes investing wisely, is cautious about throwing away money, refuses to take too many risks that likely won't pan out, and hes the one who ends up with the fortune and all the glory.

Thats similar to Melo, hes the most offensive moves, hes got the most income streams, yet the guy down the road whos less complete, only has 1 or 2 sources of income, finds a way to get the best bang for his buck efficiently.

Might be a bit of a stretch but it sort of sums of Melo in my eyes.

'It ain't about what you earn its about what you keep'

It ain't about have the most weapons in your arsenal, its about making the best use of said weapons, getting the best bang for your buck, and until Melo can do that on a level all the great ones do he will be a step behind....thats just reality.

If that doesn't make any sense, forgive me, stoned as ****. I'm not all about efficiency but when you compare similar offensive talents, guys who take similar shots, have similar offensive roles, shoulder similar offensive loads, and one guy does it way more efficiently, there goes your reason he seems to win way more often than the other guy does.

In order to win a championship, Melo HAS to turn his offensive repertoire into consistent, efficient, offensive dominance whether y'all wanna hear it or not.

You just had to throw out your money around didn't you Glamgold Mc Duck! The richest duck in the world.....so sad

[Hustla23]

Stats actually do a lot more than "merely quantify observational data" In fact it is pretty weak in that on its own its purely descriptive. It can't be used for inferences or to determine causality.

As for the bold, they are very much refutable, if not the stat itself then the formula behind deriving that stat or simply its relevance in making an argument

I forgot to consider the methodology behind formulas. You're right. Those are certainly up for debate.

[triple5real]

Think of it in $$$$. It ain't about what you earn its about what you keep.

You could make TONS of dough, more than anyone else in the 'league', have more revenue streams and more sources of income than anyone else.

But you spend it like a dumbass, make crappy investments, buy expensive brand name crap, and save next to nothing. Does that make you the richest guy around? You have the most diverse sources of income, yet can't turn it into a fortune? Can't seem to get any bang for your buck?

Yet that guy down the road may only have 1 or 2 sources of income as opposed to the 6 or 7, yet hes investing wisely, is cautious about throwing away money, refuses to take too many risks that likely won't pan out, and hes the one who ends up with the fortune and all the glory.

Thats similar to Melo, hes the most offensive moves, hes got the most income streams, yet the guy down the road whos less complete, only has 1 or 2 sources of income, finds a way to get the best bang for his buck efficiently.

Might be a bit of a stretch but it sort of sums of Melo in my eyes.

'It ain't about what you earn its about what you keep'

It ain't about have the most weapons in your arsenal, its about making the best use of said weapons, getting the best bang for your buck, and until Melo can do that on a level all the great ones do he will be a step behind....thats just reality.

If that doesn't make any sense, forgive me, stoned as ****. I'm not all about efficiency but when you compare similar offensive talents, guys who take similar shots, have similar offensive roles, shoulder similar offensive loads, and one guy does it way more efficiently, there goes your reason he seems to win way more often than the other guy does.

In order to win a championship, Melo HAS to turn his offensive repertoire into consistent, efficient, offensive dominance whether y'all wanna hear it or not.

That was LeBron in Cleveland and it never translated into a title...It's just more factors to it then Melo being better. I'm not the guy that's going to trough out stats because frankly I log on from my cell phone and that would be too much Damn work. Everyone has flaws including those consider elite. Individual stats alone will never win championships...we should be discussing other players that need to elevate their game not just Melo.

[oballers]

You do realize that rate stats like ORtg and TS% regress with an increase in USG%, right?

So comparing all these low USG players to high USG ones is null.

That's the entire premise of OWS.

Speaking of OWS:

Um, Deron Williams had a peak OWS of 8.9. So ALL of those players you listed except for Peja who was a beast in his prime, did not have a higher peak season than Deron. If we're going to pass things off as fact, let's make sure they're actually fact, shall we?

Oh, fun fact. MJ had the highest OWS out of anyone in history. I guess since this one advanced stat coincided with our preconceived notion, it must be legit, right?

Seriously you offer way too much fodder man. The highest OWS in NBA history belongs to Kareem Abdul Jabbar not Michael Jordan.

Jordan OWS (career) #4, OWS (single season) # 11
Kareem OWS (career) #1, OWS (single season) # 1

Peak season????? Deron??? What???? Those are career numbers. Live with them.

[D-Leethal]

This can be argued. These people can fall victim to confirmation bias. People will tend to favor data or purposefully present it in a way that favors this hypothesis.

FYI agree with the stats in the OP - Didn't need this thread to show Melo was or can be inefficient. I still don't think you can use these stats alone to determine in the absolute that he is lesser than other players. Neither talent nor circumstances can be fully captured in numbers. Nor does it give any indication as to what a player might do during an upcoming game.

Dirk's game has several flaws, what stats can explain what he did in the 2011 playoffs? It was literally miracle after miracle.

Again just to reiterate, don't disagree with the conclusion the OP's stats are drawing

I think thats a good example, and a reason nobody should close the door on Melo....hes definitely capable of a run like that.

[oballers]

Uh, so what are you going to back up subjective opinions with? More subjective opinions? I would think objective FACTS would take precedence over subjective opinions.

Okay, stats don't tell the whole story. That doesn't mean we should just abandon them altogether. If that's the case, why don't we just stop keeping box scores and never mention any numbers to begin with. Who cares if someone scores 20 points a game? He looked ugly doing it. That means he sucks.

You have a confused understanding of statistics if that's what your argument is. Stats don't "try to represent" something. They merely quantify observable phenomena. They are used, however, to support ideas and arguments. And they're legitimate because they are irrefutable objective pieces of KEY WORD: evidence.

If you don't agree with a certain point, then find facts to counter that point. Don't just question the credibility of the evidence that's presented. It just makes a person look ignorant.

And I have no idea who that guy is that you quoted but what he said is obviously stupid. Don't ascribe random people that you perceive to be stupid to the rest of the people who are actually competent in the field. That's bad logic.

The problem is drawing innacurate conclusions from uncorrelated statistics. Period.

If the conlusion is that he is less efficient than his peers. First define the peers, use a large enough sample size to be relevant. then you have an argument but to say he is not as good a player or scorer or is not top 5 or whatever you argue assumes that these statisics define what a top 5 player is.

That correlation has NEVER been made and is inadequate and inaccurate.

[oballers]

Completely disregarding stats is just as stupid as using them as the end-all be-all.

I'd like to think I'm further on the side of 'watching the games is more valuable than efficiency stats' but you can't just throw the stats out the window.

And when you present a flawed argument using stats, the stats will always appear flawed.

Nobody would take Tyson Chandler's all-time efficiency last season as him being a better offensive player than a guy like Kobe. Thats why you use stats in context.

I personally think the stats posted in the OP, comparing Melo to similar offensive star talents with similar roles on their respective teams and similar statures in the league was pretty telling. I don't think saying , 'Hey Theo Ratliff who took the amount of shots in a season that Melo did in 1 game has a higher TS%, look how flawed those stats are!!' really does anything to discredit the stats.

Nobody once said you could just look at a stat sheet and get all your answers, that would be stupid and that would tell us Theo Ratliff is better offensive player than Melo which is ludicrous. But when you see things from watching his game and the stats back it up it becomes apparent where the problem lies. Also, you should know that comparing certain players using certain stats is going to skew the results. Thats why you use them in reasonable context and compare similar player with similar roles.

There must be a reason the most complete offensive player doesn't win like less complete offensive players with similar offensive roles and scoring loads do. It looks to me like its because he can't translate that complete game into an efficient game...

Melo fans gotta stop getting so butt hurt. Melo has got flaws in his game, you can either choose to note it with your own eyes or let that stats point it out for you, but its obviously there.

Every player has room for improvement this is an obvious point even amongst superstars. No need to compare meaningless stats that don't correlate to how good they are but really prove that role players who take uncontested jump shots or hang out under the basket all day are the Awesome.

A statement of Melo needs to improve shot selection and his overall efficiency would be enough. That he should be more consistent on defense is also accurate. Needs to maintain conditioning OK. Needs to learn to play off of Amare better just as valuable.

But to say that he can't hang with the big boys in this league and that he is not amongst the best is inaccurate, regardless of how many uncorrelated statistics you throw out.

Michael Jordan was a below avg to avg jump shooter over at least the 1st 5 years of his career. Not to mention a poor 3 PT shooter. He improved his passing after 5 years as well. So what? People have room to grow, so do Lebron, Durant and all the rest. Pointing out that they need to improve in areas is meaningful. Pointing out that they somehow are inferior to their peers because of esoteric statistics that tell a very narrow and often innacurate story is baiting and unnecessary.

I would love to talk to the ***hole that said MJ was inferior to his contemporaries in 1987 because he couldn't shoot from distance at the same rate and wasn't as good a passer. (Oh yeah that was me )

The argument was made that Melo does not belong on the following list and or is at the bottom therefore not as good. Lets look again using a large enough sample size (career stats). Also remember known of the guys on this list are available to be come Knicks and many of them don7t play the same position (so this is an apples and oranges exercise) but lets entertain it for a moment anyway except we will add Corey Maggette and see how he compares. (See if you can tell which stats are actually most accurately portray the fact that Maggette is NOT as good as the others on this list.

Note these are career stats so sample sizes vary.

PPG | TS% | 3P% | FTM-FTA | OWS | ORTG | PER
Carmelo Anthony: 24.7, 544%, 322%, 6.3 - 7.8, 40.2, 107, 20.4

Corey Maggette 16.2, .578%, .325%, 5.6 -6.9 46.3110, 18

Kevin Love: 17.3, .566%, 372%, 4.8 - 5.8, 23.4, 117, 22.4

Dirk Nowitzki: 22.9, .581%, .380%, 5.7 -6.5, 49.1, 117, 23.6

Paul Pierce: 22.0, 569%, .369%, 6.0 - 7.4, 53.1, 109, 20.7

Blake Griffin: 21.7, 552%, .225%, 4.7 -7.9, 13.0, 112, 22.5


Maggette is #3 in OWS, #4 in ORtg, #2 TS%

Now lets look at this with the 2 stats that actually matter.

Carmelo Anthony: 24.7, 20.4

Corey Maggette 16.2, 18

Kevin Love: 17.3, 22.4

Dirk Nowitzki: 22.9, 23.6

Paul Pierce: 22.0, 20.7

Blake Griffin: 21.7, 22.5

Firstly, we see that Maggette does not belong in this discussion. And if it weren't for his efficiency Love wouldn't belong here either. What it does not show is how good a rebounder Griffin and Love are and how poor a rebounder Dirk is relative to his height. Nor does it show that Pierce and Anthony are the best passers in the group.

But it does point out 1 key fact that is relevant to Knicks fans everywhere, that although Anthony is a volume scorer over his career he has been less efficient then his peers (that is of course if you consider Griffin, Nowitski and Love his peers. I do not.) I think we all knew that though didn't we?

It also points out that Dirk has had the best overall career out of all these players. I think that too is another foregone conclusion.

So what do the stats tell me that I didn't know before. They tell me that if you put the right stats together then Corey Maggette can be one of the best players in the league if not all time.

Wow, tremendously insightful stuff.

RE: Hustla's argument re: USG%. That just feeds into my argument about offering up stats in a vaccuum without establishing any correlation.

[javsvt]

I can say this about trying to educate people with these stats. No one will remember or come back to this thread and say, "Man, I am glad I have these stats to go by, without these, I wouldn't be able to watch Melo play".