So...Hollinger..

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Me, I thought the MOV stats indicated that the Mavs were the underdog. That's where he and I differ.

That horrific loss to the Knicks won me over to the MOV stat. You don't lose blowouts like that unless you just lack the heart to always compete when you are down. And if you don't ever win games like that, it means that try as you might, you can't string together 4 stellar quarters. I can't help but think it's related to performances like the 1st quarter of the last game.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

wow, really? Those things are pretty easy to check.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/...PKB4?year=2008.

Here's Howard's performances in the playoffs for the past few years:

against Denver, Howard scored: 14, 21, 14, 0, 15 = 64
San Antonio, Howard scored: 17, 28, 17, 7, 25 = 94
New Orleans: 12, 6, 18, 10, 17 = 63
Golden State: 20, 23, 22, 20, 22, 21 = 128

Caron was: 25, 35, 17, 2, 17, 22 = 118

Caron did a bit better (thank you 35 points in the game 5 win!), but you are going to have a hard time arguing that Caron played so much better that he changed the ending of Dallas's season.

You're not doing a very good job of countering my point. In fact, you're supporting it. Howard scored 3 more points against NO and 4 more points against Denver total (in 5 games) than Caron scored in 2 games against SA this year. Howard was exceptional against SA, but that was the only time he was exceptional since the end of 2007. Which was exactly my point

So, unless you think the only reason Caron scored 60 in 2 games this playoffs was because it was against SA, one of the better defensive teams in the league come April, then I'd say the numbers above very much indicate that Caron gives you more than Howard.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'll let him speak for himself, but I'm under the impression that he either feels that Mavs were the favorites in this series or that he feels that the MOV stats were meaningless. Me, I thought the MOV stats indicated that the Mavs were the underdog. That's where he and I differ.

I disagree with Hollinger's usage of MoV stats, but I don't feel they're meaningless. I think they can be pretty useful and interesting. And I think it's definitely clear that, under the MoV stats, the Mavs were the underdogs. The Mavs were the favorites in Vegas, but the underdogs as far as MoV. There's no debate there, and I certainly wasn't creating one.

My point earlier in the thread wasn't related to whether the Mavs were underdogs or favorites.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

You're not doing a very good job of countering my point. In fact, you're supporting it. Howard scored 3 more points against NO and 4 more points against Denver total (in 5 games) than Caron scored in 2 games against SA this year. Howard was exceptional against SA, but that was the only time he was exceptional since the end of 2007. Which was exactly my point

So, unless you think the only reason Caron scored 60 in 2 games this playoffs was because it was against SA, one of the better defensive teams in the league come April, then I'd say the numbers above very much indicate that Caron gives you more than Howard.

Why do you focus on the last 2 playoff games that Caron played for the Mavs instead of the first 2 as representative of what he can do for the team? Why stop at 2007 when going back to look at what Howard can do? Why would you assume that SA is a special case for Howard, but it isn't a special case for Butler (especially if, like Hollinger does, you think Caron and Josh are basically the same player)?

If your point is that you have to jump through those hoops in order to argue that Josh would have provided less help than Caron, then I don't want to argue against it.

But most importantly, do you really think that Caron Butler as an upgrade over Josh Howard was enough to make Dallas a better post season team than San Antonio?

[Zki41]

Caron Butler is an upgrade over the current Josh Howard, maybe lateral compared to the old Josh Howard. The reality is, Howard was not playing well this season, was struggling with injuries, as well as a bunch of other issues. There is no point comparing Caron to the Howard of old, because the Howard of old is gone. If you compare the numbers for Caron in Dallas during the regular season, and Howard in Dallas during the regular season ... statistically, Caron made a more dominant impact here. Howard would have probably gotten injured just like he did in Washington if he stayed here as well.

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

According to Holinger's rankings, Utah should beat the Lakers. Lets see how that goes...

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by Zki41

Caron Butler is an upgrade over the current Josh Howard, maybe lateral compared to the old Josh Howard. .

Hollinger's whole point (and hey, maybe he was right) is that you can use stats from all year long for the post trade Mavs because quibbling over how much of an upgrade Butler might be isn't going to help Butler win any more games for the Mavs than Howard would.

Seeing as how the upgrade didn't even get us out of Round 1 of the playoffs, the only way you can disagree with Hollinger is if you want to argue that without the trade, the Mavs wouldn't have even made the playoffs.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

It really doesn't matter that Hollinger predicted the series. His use of statistics is still extremely flawed which is what the basis of my argument is.. You cannot use statistics in the manner in which he did to analyze a team based upon data that is prior to a drastic change in personnel.

I seldom lurk and almost never post here, but this thread exceeds even the usual level of disinformation on these boards.

Hollinger basis his ratings on:

1 Scoring margin
2 Strength of schedule
3 Recent performance
3 Home and road

He had RECENT PERFORMANCE covered, so quite obviously his ranking of Dallas was NOT "based upon data that is prior to a drastic change in personnel."

[Zki41]

Originally Posted by Samurai

I seldom lurk and almost never post here, but this thread exceeds even the usual level of disinformation on these boards.

Hollinger basis his ratings on:

1 Scoring margin
2 Strength of schedule
3 Recent performance
3 Home and road

He had RECENT PERFORMANCE covered, so quite obviously his ranking of Dallas was NOT "based upon data that is prior to a drastic change in personnel."

Recent performance is an extremely subjective and arbitrary amount of games Hollinger chooses to cover. He will sometimes exclude or include periods of time randomly that would counter the point he wants to make.

It's manipulation of numbers. The numbers themselves are not wrong, it's the inclusion and exclusion of certain numbers in regards to how he utilizes those numbers that is wrong.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Why do you focus on the last 2 playoff games that Caron played for the Mavs instead of the first 2 as representative of what he can do for the team?

Um, Butler scored 22 and 17 points in his first two playoff game with the Mavs. But let's focus on Butler's totals, if you like: 22, 17, 2, 17, 35, 25. That's a total of 118 points in 6 games (19.6 ppg). That's far, far better than Howard averaged against NO or Denver, and it's actually also better than what Howard averaged against SA last playoffs (18.8).

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Why stop at 2007 when going back to look at what Howard can do?

Are you really asking this question? I thought it was patently obvious--I'm stopping at 2007 because that was obviously a turning point in Josh's career. He was a nice contributor for the Mavs up until and through the 2006-2007 season. He knew his role, he was generally aggressive, he crashed the boards, and he brought energy in the first quarters especially

But after that season, he was a shell of his former self. And that's what we have to compare Butler to, since that's the Josh we traded away. We didn't trade away 2006 playoffs Josh or 2007 playoffs Josh--that guy was long gone.

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Why would you assume that SA is a special case for Howard, but it isn't a special case for Butler (especially if, like Hollinger does, you think Caron and Josh are basically the same player)?

Again, I can't believe you're asking this question as a long-time Mavs fan. Howard was notorious for playing well against SA even after he started his decline. Everybody on the board knows this, including you.

Further, this year's SA team that Butler played against was light years better than last year's SA team that Howard played against. The two are hardly comparable.

As for Hollinger, first of all, he's wrong that they're the same player. Secondly, even if they were the exact same player in terms of production, that doesn't mean they're the same person. It's entirely feasible that one would have extra confidence against a particular team (Howard against SA) and that the other would see that team just like any other team.

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

If your point is that you have to jump through those hoops in order to argue that Josh would have provided less help than Caron, then I don't want to argue against it.

Yeah, I'm not jumping through hoops in the least. The numbers back up what I'm saying. But whatever makes you feel better, I guess.

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

But most importantly, do you really think that Caron Butler as an upgrade over Josh Howard was enough to make Dallas a better post season team than San Antonio?

This is a loaded question if I've ever heard one. First of all, the Mavs just lost to SA, so it'd be hard for me to argue that they're a better postseason team. Second, you're conflating two issues here. I never claimed Butler was "enough to make the Mavs a better postseason team than SA," because we have evidence to the contrary. What I said was that Butler provides significantly more than Howard does. That's especially true against every team other than SA, who seemed to be the only team Howard showed up against in his last couple of years here. And even against the Spurs--Howard's lone saving grace--Butler still averaged more PPG this year than Howard did last year.

Honestly, I'm still really curious as to why you posted Howard's playoff numbers against NO and Denver as if those numbers didn't totally rebuke your entire point. The next time Butler totals 63 or 64 points in 5 playoff games, you let me know. Then maybe we'll have a debate.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

As for Hollinger, first of all, he's wrong that they're the same player.

I doubt that Hollinger ever claimed this.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Um, Butler scored 22 and 17 points in his first two playoff game with the Mavs.

Very Josh Howard-like.

I thought it was patently obvious--I'm stopping at 2007 because that was obviously a turning point in Josh's career.

It's obvious to you because you are looking at the numbers with your mind already made up. Maybe Howard does well and poor in alternating series, and you are choosing to pick out two of them to say, "That's what you can expect from Howard," while making different rationalizations for ignoring the other numbers.

Howard was notorious for playing well against SA even after he started his decline.

Well, we played SA this year in the playoffs.

What I said was that Butler provides significantly more than Howard does.

If we're all going to just make up our own definition of "significantly," then we can't have a coherent discussion. We're talking about whether Hollinger was right in his context, the context that led him to use the same season-long numbers to evaluate pre- and post-trade Mavs. Here's what he said:

“So how much better does that lofty sum make Dallas? Based on player efficiency rating, it doesn’t move the needle much. Our Trade Machine analysis is that the swap improves Dallas by only one win for the remainder of the season, largely because this season the difference in performance between Butler and Howard is much smaller than generally perceived. In fact, statistically, there’s been virtually no difference between the two players over the past four seasons, including this one, in which Butler’s numbers have been down just as sharply as Howard’s. "

http://www.thetwomangame.com/2010/02...incoln-tattoo/

Caron had exactly 1 game that looked like it was more than Howard would provide. To me, that wasn't significant.


quibble:

The next time Butler totals 63 or 64 points in 5 playoff games, you let me know. Then maybe we'll have a debate.

Please, if you are going to make this kind of argument, follow it through. You are arguing 2 things that apply here, that SA is special for Howard, but is not special for Butler. If you make that first argument, you also have to say, "The next time Butler scores more than 63 or 64 points for the Mavs in the playoffs against a team that's not the San Antonio Spurs. . . " Obviously we can't do either, so it's really not a point of argument.

[Usually Lurkin]

Fromthe same Hollinger story, in which he evaluates the Mavs/Wizards trade and lays out a measuring stick:

As a result, my follow-up question is whether the Mavs are done dealing. If they turn around and swap Dampier's mammoth expiring deal (he's technically under contact next year but his salary is unguaranteed) for a quality shooting guard, I'd feel much better about the entire exercise. But at least one front office source I talked to expects the Mavs to wait until summer before trading Dampier.

Without such a second trade, however, it appears the Mavs are spending a total of $30 million just to improve their odds of making the second round.

which seems to be pretty much where this board is at.

[mcsluggo]

i know how beloved Hollinger is here.... but did any "insiders" read this article?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...s-chart-100805

what does it say?

[Windmill360]

Dallas isn't even in the top 10. I read it somewhere else. San Antonio is up there though.