Round 2: Celtics vs Cavs

[chilidawg]

I wonder what the sentiment would be here today on Tatum’s performance had we lost the game. He repeatedly took and missed pull-up threes early in the shot clock, had an embarrassing sequence to end the 1H with a miss, frustration foul then allowed a Mitchell blow by And1 with a cheap 3rd foul. He showed no urgency all night even when it was just a 10-11 point game. I love Jayson but man I don’t know how anyone can watch that game and say he played well. The best thing he did was not take more shots.

No matter how many times people post actual numbers here about how much more effective the Celtics offense has been in the six playoff games alone because of Tatum, you're slagging his production and efficiency. They've won 5 of 6 games and have ungodly offensive ratings when Tatum is there and pedestrian ones where he's not. The data is in. The fact that it disagrees with your Twitter group think sources has led you to discredit it, along with Darko, LeBron, BBRef, and other data all season. That's fine. It's a free country. But it's odd to accuse this board of being homers and group thinkers when you're the one disregarding data.

It seems to me both of these are right. Watching the game I had the same reaction as HRB, just seemed to me a low energy, frustrated Tatum type game on both ends. At the end of the day though the C's outscored the Cavs handily when Tatum played (according to the stat which shall not be named). Watching Tatum I find to be somewhat frustrating, but there's no denying the effectiveness of the team when he's on the court. That's been the case for a long time.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

It seems to me both of these are right. Watching the game I had the same reaction as HRB, just seemed to me a low energy, frustrated Tatum type game. At the end of the day though the C's outscored the Cavs handily when Tatum played (according to the stat which shall not be named). Watching Tatum I find to be somewhat frustrating, but there's no denying the effectiveness of the team when he's on the court. That's been the case for a long time.

This is why +/- shouldn’t even be a stat that’s published. Everyone on the floor gets credit for Derrick going nuclear regardless of whether they were involved in the 2-man or 3-man game. I mean did Jayson have “calm eyes” while meandering 30 feet from the basket on the weak side that comforted Derrick? All kidding aside, having a guy like Tatum on the floor DOES tend to have a positive effect on the overall confidence of the unit so yes I want him out there…..but as I asked, I wonder what the tenor would be here today if White and Jaylen weren’t in their zones last night.

 

[Jimbodandy]

…..but as I asked, I wonder what the tenor would be here today if White and Jaylen weren’t in their zones last night.

You pose that question as if these things aren't related. I believe that's a fundamental misinterpretation of the effect that a Tatum has on the floor. Build walls, hedge, trap, throw extra guys at him in various ways, and that's why Brown and White are getting whatever the fuck they want.

Sure, if both were bricklaying and Tatum had no production because he was feeding them, then yeah Tatum would get a pigpile here and on Twitter. Doesn’t mean it's a bad approach.

 

[benhogan]

I wonder what the tenor would be here today if White and Jaylen weren’t in their zones last night.

I can't imagine we'd be very happy if 3 of our TOP 4 scorers shot like crap (with the 4th guy missing). BUT that's probably what it will take for the CAVs to beat these Celtics.

I wonder if we'll still see old friend Max Strus guarding Jaylen Brown

It must feel like Christmas Morning every time JB gets Herro or Strus on an island.

 

[SteveF]

I think +/- and/or on/off are pretty useful after 300-400 games or so. Well, useful for fans who want to have some sense of a quality of a player without having watched all the games, or at least to lead one to wonder why a purportedly good player does so poorly on impact metrics.

Derrick White is -25.4 on/off per 100 possessions according to pbpstats.com over these 6 games. If having a good +/- or on/off is evidence of a player being good, does that mean Derrick White has actually sucked in these 6 games?

 

[Eric Fernsten's Disco Mustache]

It seems to me both of these are right

I'll add to this. Three things can be true at once...

1. Tatum seemed to play an uninspired, low-energy game that I no longer try to crawl into his brain and understand. I served my time playing armchair psychoanalyst to the dude through a TV. But having been paroled early I'm not going back
2. Tatum shot poorly, on a bunch of shots that were good looks in the context of what was happening, and a few others that weren't
3. Tatum did a bunch of other things (gravity, screens, a few contested rebounds, yadda yadda) that helped the team win possessions, and which combined with other guys having big nights by their standards (Jaylen, White, Kornet) led us to crush an inferior team without too much trouble easily

None of these three are in conflict with each other, although I'm with HRB that if we'd lost the game the emphasis on #1 would have gone way up

 

[tims4wins]

Tell me you don't understand stats without telling me you don't understand stats @SteveF .

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I think +/- and/or on/off are pretty useful after 300-400 games or so. Well, useful for fans who want to have some sense of a quality of a player without having watched all the games, or at least to lead one to wonder why a purportedly good player does so poorly on impact metrics.

Derrick White is -25.4 on/off per 100 possessions according to pbpstats.com over these 6 games. If having a good +/- or on/off is evidence of a player being good, does that mean Derrick White has actually sucked in these 6 games?

Boston won G1 by 25 points in a contest that was never in doubt. The result is a raging debate about how Tatum might torpedo their shot if he keeps playing at his current level.

Of course we can make a case that Derrick White is just on a heater and mean reversion will also blow up the team's chances. Its what we do.

The Cs won but did not execute perfectly and some players played better than others. Regardless of whether you enjoy playoff victories or complaining about the team, they gave everyone something to chew on during the off days.

 

[Jimbodandy]

I think +/- and/or on/off are pretty useful after 300-400 games or so. Well, useful for fans who want to have some sense of a quality of a player without having watched all the games, or at least to lead one to wonder why a purportedly good player does so poorly on impact metrics.

Derrick White is -25.4 on/off per 100 possessions according to pbpstats.com over these 6 games. If having a good +/- or on/off is evidence of a player being good, does that mean Derrick White has actually sucked in these 6 games?

Fwiw, I was talking about numbers like these, not six game raw plus minus:

http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/round-2-celtics-vs-cavs.42603/post-6121010

 

[SteveF]

Fwiw, I was talking about numbers like these, not six game raw plus minus:

http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/round-2-celtics-vs-cavs.42603/post-6121010

I wasn't responding to you or that post, either. I apologize if it came off that way.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Tell me you don't understand stats without telling me you don't understand stats @SteveF .

I thought his post illustrated that he both understands stats and the importance of sample size, to be honest....though I'm not sure everyone here really understands the relationship of those well.

 

[Leon Trotsky]

I went looking and didn't see a Cavs thread, so will park this here

Game 1 of this series reminded me that it's been a little depressing to see Evan Mobley plateau somewhat in year 3.

At the game last night I thought exactly this. I had a very good view of the paint and for the first three quarters Mobley was just abused on both ends. Very tentative and just a half to full step from where he should have been to be successful on nearly every play. In the 4th he kept getting the ball down low against smaller guys, like DWhite, and finally started to use his size and skills, but it was way too late. If they have any hope, they will need him to really step up and I don't think he has it in him at all at this stage of his career.

 

[InstaFace]

I thought his post illustrated that he both understands stats and the importance of sample size, to be honest....though I'm not sure everyone here really understands the relationship of those well.

Yes, SteveF has shown all year that he's got a very sharp eye for stats, and tracks stuff I don't even know exists. I pay pretty close attention when he chimes in on something.

I read tims' post as a snipe about the small sample size rant from the other day. But, just as you say, SteveF's post shows a nuanced view of it.

I think +/- and/or on/off are pretty useful after 300-400 games or so. Well, useful for fans who want to have some sense of a quality of a player without having watched all the games, or at least to lead one to wonder why a purportedly good player does so poorly on impact metrics.

Derrick White is -25.4 on/off per 100 possessions according to pbpstats.com over these 6 games. If having a good +/- or on/off is evidence of a player being good, does that mean Derrick White has actually sucked in these 6 games?

I assume your question here is somewhat rhetorical, since you acknowledged the matter of sample size upfront. But to the extent it's not...

Derrick White has 49 playoff games for Boston across 3 seasons - which I'd consider enough sample size to be worth discussing, YMMV. But in those, he has a -8.3 on/off per 100. -25 is clearly a SSS fluke, but if the real number is closer to -8, or even -3 for that matter, that certainly is surprising given his emerging rep.

Now, a few things come to mind, none of them definitive for me:

1) He's playing against the starters now. Maybe a lot of the big runs we go on are when our bench is beating up the opposing bench.

2) His raw +/- has gone from +1/+2 on his first two seasons of playoffs here, to +10.5 in the 6 games so far this spring. But, of course, there's the -25 on/off. So, it is both true that he has been on the court when we have done relatively less well, and we've done better when he's been sitting... but also true that when he's on the court we roll the opposition pretty good regardless. Hard to be sure which matters more, or which says more.

3) Maybe he's gambling a bit for his blocks and steals and transition plays, and is letting the team get burnt a bit as a result. I dunno, anything's possible </KG>. But we know it's not from him missing a bunch of shots. So maybe it's that his teammates are missing a bunch of shots when he's out there, just by coincidence.

4) Or maybe it's just a bad stat where the noise is swamping the signal, even after 49 playoff games. I wouldn't think so, but it's a possibility.

It's a curious anomaly, that's for sure.

 

[Jimbodandy]

I wasn't responding to you or that post, either. I apologize if it came off that way.

No worries. Agreed on small sample plus/minus. Just wanted to pull that post forward as an example.

 

[InstaFace]

I thought his post illustrated that he both understands stats and the importance of sample size, to be honest....though I'm not sure everyone here really understands the relationship of those well.

Yes, SteveF has shown all year that he's got a very sharp eye for stats, and tracks stuff I don't even know exists. I pay pretty close attention when he chimes in on something.

I read tims' post as a snipe about the small sample size rant from the other day. But, just as you say, SteveF's post shows a nuanced view of it.

I think +/- and/or on/off are pretty useful after 300-400 games or so. Well, useful for fans who want to have some sense of a quality of a player without having watched all the games, or at least to lead one to wonder why a purportedly good player does so poorly on impact metrics.

Derrick White is -25.4 on/off per 100 possessions according to pbpstats.com over these 6 games. If having a good +/- or on/off is evidence of a player being good, does that mean Derrick White has actually sucked in these 6 games?

I assume your question here is somewhat rhetorical, since you acknowledged the matter of sample size upfront. But to the extent it's not...

Derrick White has 49 playoff games for Boston across 3 seasons - which I'd consider enough sample size to be worth discussing, YMMV. But in those, he has a -8.3 on/off per 100. -25 is clearly a SSS fluke, but if the real number is closer to -8, or even -3 for that matter, that certainly is surprising given his emerging rep.

Now, a few things come to mind, none of them definitive for me:

1) He's playing against the starters now. Maybe a lot of the big runs we go on are when our bench is beating up the opposing bench.

2) His raw +/- has gone from +1/+2 on his first two seasons of playoffs here, to +10.5 in the 6 games so far this spring. But, of course, there's the -25 on/off. So, it is both true that he has been on the court when we have done relatively less well, and we've done better when he's been sitting... but also true that when he's on the court we roll the opposition pretty good regardless. Hard to be sure which matters more, or which says more.

3) Maybe he's gambling a bit for his blocks and steals and transition plays, and is letting the team get burnt a bit as a result. I dunno, anything's possible </KG>. But we know it's not from him missing a bunch of shots. So maybe it's that his teammates are missing a bunch of shots when he's out there, just by coincidence.

4) Or maybe it's just a bad stat where the noise is swamping the signal, even after 49 playoff games. I wouldn't think so, but it's a possibility.

It's a curious anomaly, that's for sure.

 

[SteveF]

I assume your question here is somewhat rhetorical, since you acknowledged the matter of sample size upfront. But to the extent it's not...

I was using a reductio ad absurdum*, the absurd conclusion being that Derrick White has sucked when, I think quite obviously, he has not sucked.

But I do appreciate the effort in showing why/how the conclusion is (or maybe 'might be' is the better characterization) absurd.

*Actually looking up the definition, I'm not sure what I did qualifies as a reductio, but eh. You probably get the idea.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Just since people continue to miss this: SteveFs point is that we shouldn't rely on small sample size plus/minus. He is not trying to say Derrick White sucks.

 

[tims4wins]

Mea culpa if I misinterpreted

 

[Eric Fernsten's Disco Mustache]

At the game last night I thought exactly this. I had a very good view of the paint and for the first three quarters Mobley was just abused on both ends. Very tentative and just a half to full step from where he should have been to be successful on nearly every play. In the 4th he kept getting the ball down low against smaller guys, like DWhite, and finally started to use his size and skills, but it was way too late. If they have any hope, they will need him to really step up and I don't think he has it in him at all at this stage of his career.

Thanks for the first hand account

This year may just be something he needs to get through. His first time responding to missing significant time to injury. His first really competitive seven-game playoff series.

He's gotten better on offense every year that he's been in the league, which is what you want to see. This is a big off season for him. That's where a lot of young players make themselves better

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Just since people continue to miss this: SteveFs point is that we shouldn't rely on small sample size plus/minus. He is not trying to say Derrick White sucks.

At least we came out of this with a new inside joke that SteveF hates Derrick White so there’s that.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

At least we came out of this with a new inside joke that SteveF hates Derrick White so there’s that.

Yeah, I really don't understand what he has against Derrick White!

 

[jezza1918]

At least we came out of this with a new inside joke that SteveF hates Derrick White so there’s that.

I mean it’s only a few posts so could just chalk it up to SSS!

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I mean it’s only a few posts so could just chalk it up to SSS!

I love this board sometimes.

 

[Auger34]

I'll add to this. Three things can be true at once...

1. Tatum seemed to play an uninspired, low-energy game that I no longer try to crawl into his brain and understand. I served my time playing armchair psychoanalyst to the dude through a TV. But having been paroled early I'm not going back
2. Tatum shot poorly, on a bunch of shots that were good looks in the context of what was happening, and a few others that weren't
3. Tatum did a bunch of other things (gravity, screens, a few contested rebounds, yadda yadda) that helped the team win possessions, and which combined with other guys having big nights by their standards (Jaylen, White, Kornet) led us to crush an inferior team without too much trouble easily

None of these three are in conflict with each other, although I'm with HRB that if we'd lost the game the emphasis on #1 would have gone way up

Great post. Agree with all of these things.

IMO, last nights game was the worst of the playoffs for Tatum by a wide margin….and the Celtics won by 25.

 

[Jimbodandy]

At least we came out of this with a new inside joke that SteveF hates Derrick White so there’s that.

Yeah, I really don't understand what he has against Derrick White!

I mean it’s only a few posts so could just chalk it up to SSS!

This is a good run of posts. Very good pointz.

 

[InstaFace]

I was using a reductio ad absurdum*, the absurd conclusion being that Derrick White has sucked when, I think quite obviously, he has not sucked.

Yes, that was the "assume it was rhetorical" part of my post, apologies if that wasn't clear. Neither of us are taking a 6-game sample for +/- as saying much. And I get that you're joking / piling on tue points, much as I was the other night about Jaylen being worst on the team in +/- (despite having probably his best game).

But it does raise an open question of why White's on-off hasn't been good in the playoffs across the last 3 years, whether there's anything to take from that (especially if his on-court +/- remains so positive), and at what sample size it would mean something.

 

[slamminsammya]

Efficiency differential is noisy (which is what +/- measures). On/off is a difference of two efficiency differentials (+/- on versus +/- off). A difference of two noisy statistics will tend to be even noisier. I think its simple as that.

 

[SteveF]

Yes, that was the "assume it was rhetorical" part of my post, apologies if that wasn't clear. Neither of us are taking a 6-game sample for +/- as saying much. And I get that you're joking / piling on tue points, much as I was the other night about Jaylen being worst on the team in +/- (despite having probably his best game).

But it does raise an open question of why White's on-off hasn't been good in the playoffs across the last 3 years, whether there's anything to take from that (especially if his on-court +/- remains so positive), and at what sample size it would mean something.

The "But to the extent it's not..." made me nervous, so I felt I had to be extremely clear.

I do, after all, have a reputation of hating Derrick White.

 

[jablo1312]

I'm now at the point where I think if this team doesn't win 6 of their next 7, I think they're doing themselves a dis-service, risking guys to injury, and not being a serious team. I know that sounds kinda outrageous, but its where I'm at. I have a lot of respect for the Knicks but they are literally a walking MASH unit. The Pacers are simply not a serious team on defense. Even if Dean Wade and hobbled Jarrett Allen come back there is no reason this series should go more then 5 at the very max. I get you can ease off the breaks a bit up 3-0, or a team can shoot the lights out, but barring injury they need to take full advantage of this opportunity. It is incredibly unlikely they will ever have an easier path to the Finals even accounting for the Porzingis injury.

Please, for the love of god, don't fuck around.

 

[riboflav]

Agreed. Just another way of framing this - do we think that if we took Jayson Tatum from last year or the year before, and put him on this years team...and the celts were still be defended the way they are, would the celtics offense look better or worse? Obvs no way to prove it but Id bet pretty heavily on worse.

If you took this Tatum and put him on the 2022 Celtics v. the 2022 Warriors the Celtics already have banner 18. And, this is why certain posters here bashed the hell out of him that June. And, they're the same ones now saying he's not scoring enough or whatever. The Warriors modeled the defense on what the Heat had done to the Celtics. Make him a driver, make him make decisions. So what has Tatum done in the last two years? Become a much better driver, passer, and decision-maker. It's honestly infuriating to me that people cannot see this or are choosing willfully to ignore this and just shade him for not being perfect.

 

[riboflav]

I think, for some here and nationally, the ideal would be Tatum scores 33 a game and they win by 20 points a game and win the title. Boo hoo. Not happening.

Will there be games where this happens? Probably. But, it's just not necessary right now and such a wasted worry. We should tell Tatum hey tomorrow try to win by just 5 points and be sure to score like 40 then everyone can feel good about you again.

 

[lars10]

I think, for some here and nationally, the ideal would be Tatum scores 33 a game and they win by 20 points a game and win the title. Boo hoo. Not happening.

Will there be games where this happens? Probably. But, it's just not necessary right now and such a wasted worry. We should tell Tatum hey tomorrow try to win by just 5 points and be sure to score like 40 then everyone can feel good about you again.

If Tatum scored 33 there would just be more posts about him ISO'ing, shooting too much, and not passing enough.

 

[benhogan]

The Tatum melodrama is reaching new levels.

Everyone here loves JT, his shot has been off for the last 2 weeks. It will return, hopefully sometime soon.

 

[Euclis20]

The Tatum melodrama is reaching new levels.

Everyone here loves JT, his shot has been off for the last 2 weeks. It will return, hopefully sometime soon.

The best part is people are actually wondering if he's capable of it. This is the same guy that exploded for 67 points in the final 5 quarters of the ECSF less than a year ago when facing elimination against the league MVP. Everyone talks about sacrificing your own numbers for the greater good, but very few actually follow that path to its logical conclusion.

 

[riboflav]

The best part is people are actually wondering if he's capable of it. This is the same guy that exploded for 67 points in the final 5 quarters of the ECSF less than a year ago when facing elimination against the league MVP. Everyone talks about sacrificing your own numbers for the greater good, but very few actually follow that path to its logical conclusion.

He scored 46 holy sh.t on the road in game six in 2022 vs the defending champs down 3-2 at 24 years old. Imagine the YouTube stories had Larry done that.

Thing is Larry never did that. Why not, Ribo? He didn't have to.

 

[riboflav]

The Tatum melodrama is reaching new levels.

Everyone here loves JT, his shot has been off for the last 2 weeks. It will return, hopefully sometime soon.

I agree and posted as much in the game thread last night. Last night, was his second worse game of the playoffs this year.

 

[riboflav]

If you all need a reminder you should watch this:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPT_Cbq4FSM

 

[riboflav]

What a world when you try to guard him straight up.

Its boring honestly to have explain what he’s doing this year.

 

[chilidawg]

What a world when you try to guard him straight up.

Its boring honestly to have explain what he’s doing this year.

Honestly, if you're bored why bother repeatedly lecturing us? I think we all actually understand it pretty well.

 

[ManicCompression]

It’s really a simple question: Is playoff Jayson a thing?

 

[lovegtm]

Speaking as someone who likes discussing Tatum and has done a lot of it in this thread: could we move the Tatum discussion to his thread?

 

[Auger34]

The Tatum melodrama is reaching new levels.

Everyone here loves JT, his shot has been off for the last 2 weeks. It will return, hopefully sometime soon.

Its much easier to complain and act like everyone here hates him

 

[benhogan]

Its much easier to complain and act like everyone here hates him

Brad's handiwork created All-Star level talent 1-5 (with #6-9 being excellent complimentary role players)

This team can withstand injuries & shooting slumps from a few players, even if they play the San Antonio Nuggets, Luka's Mavs, Bron/IST Banner raising Lakers, & now the MJ Edwards Wolves in the FINALS.

As long as ALL the C's bring defensive effort, hustle, & move the ball on offense it will be glorious.

The good thing is 90% of this Board understands this (while only 10% of the NBA media does)

 

[RorschachsMask]

Came across this on twitter a bit ago. I feel like this shifting a bit would help get Tatum going, as it’s pretty extreme lol.

 

[InstaFace]

The passing differential is one thing (being next to Nikola Jokic in something probably isn't a big deal, especially if that thing happens to be his calling card)... but the usage rate too - Tatum's using up possessions less frequently than CJ McCollum or Bobby Portis? I guess Jaylen's up there at #8, so a lot of the traffic is going his way.

 

[Eric Fernsten's Disco Mustache]

The thing about that chart is that Tatum and Jokic are the only player on it whose role in the offense is to be the main instigator/distributor (what everyone used to think PGs were supposed to do) for everyone else

All those guys in blue are either guards who are supposed to look for their own shot (Brunson, SGA, Luka, Murray), shooting/off ball wings (Durant, Spider), or scoring bigs (Embiid, Bam)

The weird inclusion here is Bobby Portis. Like, you got two guys who play a huge and central role in their teams offenses (Joker and Tatum) and then you've got a random bench dude who passes the ball a lot because he's almost always his team's worst shooter on the court.

 

[lovegtm]

The passing differential is one thing (being next to Nikola Jokic in something probably isn't a big deal, especially if that thing happens to be his calling card)... but the usage rate too - Tatum's using up possessions less frequently than CJ McCollum or Bobby Portis? I guess Jaylen's up there at #8, so a lot of the traffic is going his way.

I need to do a long post on this at some point, but the Celtics have a very non-traditional offense that leverages
- Tatum being a gameplanning focus for other teams
- the threat of Tatum being able to bully guys if you give him the matchup he wants
- White, Jaylen, KP, Jrue all being good advantage maintainers and play finishers
- White, Jaylen, KP, Jrue all being sorta meh at consistent advantage creation solo

The offensive philosophy is clearly:
- have Tatum create advantages (via initial ball-handling, screening, or cutting)
- rely on other guys to then expand and exploit those advantages

It's clearly effective: they're the best offense in history. But it's also really non-traditional. Even though it has similarities to other good offenses like the peak GSW ones, it doesn't rely as much on the top-5 guy(s) going off.

EDIT: in some ways, it has more in common with soccer spacing and advantage creation than it does with other contemporary NBA offenses. That's a bit extreme (obviously you'll be more similar to your own sport), but also a good intuition pump.

 

[lovegtm]

Incidentally, this is why the people who are saying "c'mon, don't give me this Tatum-shot-badly-but-was-the-key crap; I can see that DWhite and Jaylen went off! If they didn't make those shots, the Cs would have been screwed!"

They're basically right, but it sort of misses the point that the whole offense is designed around the assumption that those guys will go off after Tatum forces initial rotations/makes the D uncomfortable. There's a reason their offensive rating craters when he's off the floor.

 

[Eric Fernsten's Disco Mustache]

Tatum's using up possessions less frequently than CJ McCollum or Bobby Portis? I guess Jaylen's up there at #8, so a lot of the traffic is going his way.

You probably remember this, although it's the kind of thing I need to look up from time to time to remind myself, but usage rate just tells you whether the player *ends* a possession (through a shot, turnover, etc.). It might be better called finishing rate.

Tatum starts and is involved in the middle of lots of our possessions, although other people often end up ending them. His and Joker's usage rates are lower than Jaylen and Murray for a reason.

It's clearly effective... But it's also really non-traditional

What lovegtm said

Although it's not unprecedented. The offense that those old LeBron Miami Heat teams ran were based on similar principles. They spread the court, pulled the other team's big men out of the paint, and the had LeBron and DWade drive with a bunch of pass/shoot options. That got defenses scrambling, which they worked until they had something good.

I'd like to think that Spo and Miami came up with this scheme because KG was so disruptive as a help defender near the basket. But I think the simpler and probably more accurate explanation is that if you have a choice between having Mario Chalmers or LeBron James initiate your offense, LeBron is the better bet.

 

[bakahump]

Stats are great and add a tremendous amount to the discussion here. I know I have learned a metric shit ton about stats and still know nothing Jon Snow.

That said I sure hope We trade Derrick White to the Cavs before Game 2 as he is single handedly torpedoing this teams chances. Better he be "-25" for the Cavs and ensure our sweep.

Or.....sometimes our eyes are more right then what the stats portray.