- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Dwight Effect is BS
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:25 pm to PrimeTime Money
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:25 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:
I like both.
That wasn't the question.
0
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:26 pm to Boomshockalocka
quote:
I said Dwight effect doesn't matter when Aldridge is draining midrange shots. Obviously Dwight effect is forcing teams to take midrange shots instead of shots at the rim. When the midrange shots are going in, Dwight effect is negated.
Wrong. The effect that that study is on is not without effect for mid-range shots. The whole point is that your other 4 defenders and their offense plays differently based on who's under the rim. Aldridge can be guarded more aggressively if his man knows that he has Larry Sanders at the rim if he goes by him.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:28 pm to Scrowe
quote:
B) Proximal FG%: the relative efficiencies of shooters in the proximity of the defender. Overall, when there is a qualifying interior defender within 5 feet of a shot attempt, the NBA shoots 45.6% from the field; however this value varies considerably depending on which defender that is.The most effective proximate defender in our study was Larry Sanders; opponents shot only 34.9% when he was within 5 feet of their shot.
There were 2 studies. Case Study 1 and 2. You are using the numbers for 1. That explanation was for 2. The numbers for 2 are further down the page. Look again
Case Study 1: The Basket Proximity Condition The objective of the first case study was to examine the ability of interior defenders to “protect the basket.” This case study considered shot attempts that occurred when there was an interior defender within 5 feet of the basket and was designed to measure two aspects of point prevention:
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:33 pm to Boomshockalocka
quote:
Obviously Dwight effect is forcing teams to take midrange shots instead of shots at the rim.
This is from the study:
We define “The Dwight Effect” as the ability of an interior defender to reduce the efficiency of an opponent’s shooting behavior.
So if efficiency is what we're looking for he doesn't allow the least amount of points per shot defended and he allows a one of the highest 3pt percentages.
Also, here are opponents overall field goal percentage in decimal format of the shots defended by the players in the study. Looking at this you see that he's still not the best at reducing FG%, he ranks 13th.
Larry Sanders 0.356576
Roy Hibbert 0.365428
Serge Ibaka 0.374979
Elton Brand 0.37871
Kosta Koufos 0.384955
Jermaine O'Neal 0.388027
Nick Collison 0.417521
Kendrick Perkins 0.418812
Nene Hilario 0.419393
LaMarcus Aldridge 0.421255
Marc Gasol 0.424404
Joakim Noah 0.4252
Dwight Howard 0.42579
Nazr Mohammed 0.426683
Emeka Okafor 0.429109
Andris Biedrins 0.431832
Chris Bosh 0.433911
JaVale McGee 0.434366
Kevin Seraphin 0.435472
Ekpe Udoh 0.436059
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:38 pm to Boomshockalocka
You know why no one wants to put a bet with you, because you never stick to your end of the bargain when you LOSE.
It was - not to post on PT, but we see you ALL the time posting, only to edit.
It was:
PT: AD is a good defender, he puts up good blocks, blah blah
Boom: Dwight is a better defender, i.e. Dwight Effect, so he doesn't get block #s, blah blah.
PT: AD can defend everywhere unlike Dwight, blah blah
Boom: Dwight has a better rating, blah blah, dwight effect
PT: Insert long post of Dwight not being that great outside of 5ft or whatever
Boom: Well...LMA drained 17ft jumpers so Dwight Effect is useless
PT: Exactly, dwight isn't a superior all around defender
Boom: BUT BUT, DWIGHT EFFECT.
PT: Defense isn't just 5ft in
Boom: LOLOL tell me when AD does something Dwight has done.
Circles all day.
It was - not to post on PT, but we see you ALL the time posting, only to edit.
It was:
PT: AD is a good defender, he puts up good blocks, blah blah
Boom: Dwight is a better defender, i.e. Dwight Effect, so he doesn't get block #s, blah blah.
PT: AD can defend everywhere unlike Dwight, blah blah
Boom: Dwight has a better rating, blah blah, dwight effect
PT: Insert long post of Dwight not being that great outside of 5ft or whatever
Boom: Well...LMA drained 17ft jumpers so Dwight Effect is useless
PT: Exactly, dwight isn't a superior all around defender
Boom: BUT BUT, DWIGHT EFFECT.
PT: Defense isn't just 5ft in
Boom: LOLOL tell me when AD does something Dwight has done.
Circles all day.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:41 pm to htran90
ban yourself for the day.. fact is I never said what you said I did and you're wrong man up bro.
dwight effect is not a "defense" for why aldrdige went off. There is no "defense" for why aldridge went off last season, he was making contested fadeaways over 7 footers, that's why Dwight being the premier interior defender didn't get houston out of rd 1 last year.
THATS how the posts went. See ya tmrw bro and galactic inquisitor too since he tried to pull the same BS as you in an earlir thread
dwight effect is not a "defense" for why aldrdige went off. There is no "defense" for why aldridge went off last season, he was making contested fadeaways over 7 footers, that's why Dwight being the premier interior defender didn't get houston out of rd 1 last year.
THATS how the posts went. See ya tmrw bro and galactic inquisitor too since he tried to pull the same BS as you in an earlir thread
This post was edited on 10/30/14 at 3:45 pm
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:44 pm to Boomshockalocka
Sure, Saints game is on tonight anyway.
See you tomorrow, I can at least say I manned up and won't post. You can't, so obviously you're not a man you troll.
See you tomorrow, I can at least say I manned up and won't post. You can't, so obviously you're not a man you troll.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:46 pm to htran90
quote:
See you tomorrow, I can at least say I manned up and won't post
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:51 pm to htran90
Why do you guys continue to encourage him? Seriously.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:55 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Why do you guys continue to encourage him? Seriously.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:56 pm to Fun Bunch
They like being part of a group of 20-25 vs 1 that consistently gets destroyed by the one.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:57 pm to TheSexecutioner
quote:
There were 2 studies. Case Study 1 and 2. You are using the numbers for 1. That explanation was for 2. The numbers for 2 are further down the page. Look again
Wow, sure enough. So I determined the FG% when the player was within 5ft of the basket. What's crazy is now relooking at all of the numbers, how in the hell are teams shooting 10% from 3 when Serge Ibaka is within 5 ft of the basket
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:58 pm to Boomshockalocka
People on this board get bothered by stuff too easily
They would get torn to shreds on the MB
They would get torn to shreds on the MB
Posted on 10/30/14 at 3:59 pm to danman6336
BUMP. MY. THREAD. INFORM. ZE. MASSES. OF. BOOMBOLA!
ETA: Research has shown thread to be on page 6.
ETA: Research has shown thread to be on page 6.
This post was edited on 10/30/14 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 10/30/14 at 4:01 pm to ShamelessPel
ah yeah
Posted on 10/30/14 at 4:04 pm to Scrowe
quote:
how in the hell are teams shooting 10% from 3 when Serge Ibaka is within 5 ft of the basket
Like I said, low sample size, which is why I was trying to distance myself from using him. I think as the sample increases, he would obviously give up higher 3% but less close shots as he's a huge outlier. I think he's an elite defender but this study doesn't prove that like it does with Sanders and Hibbert.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 4:10 pm to TheSexecutioner
Another fun fact, Tim Duncan with all those years on the tires is in the top 15 of opponent field goal % when within 5ft of the shot.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 5:08 pm to Boomshockalocka
quote:
he was better than that in the playoffs last year.
When Aldridge went in his arse dry?
Posted on 10/30/14 at 5:13 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
Actually Aldridge did most of his damage v asik.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 5:28 pm to Boomshockalocka
Most of it was against Jones. McHale ended up starting Asik at PF in game 3 because Jones got destroyed the first two games.
Asik did a pretty good job at limiting Aldridge. Aldridge was still making ridiculous shots with Asik playing good defense on him. He just couldn't miss.
But those two 40+ point games came against Jones.
Asik did a pretty good job at limiting Aldridge. Aldridge was still making ridiculous shots with Asik playing good defense on him. He just couldn't miss.
But those two 40+ point games came against Jones.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News