The Denver Nuggets 2017 Series Thread

[MHSL82]

This thread will be out of order because I'm going to first post what I see based upon the box score as the game goes on and then I will go home and watch the game and maybe comment. Maybe not.

So far, through 18 minutes, Joe Ingles is the MVP. It looks like Rodney Hood came off the bench and did OK in the first half.

Bonus points for my speech recognition for getting Joe Ingles name correctly on the first try.

 

[MHSL82]

Note to anyone following along, this year I'm going to try to start a new thread whenever I game starts and that thread will be bumps the next time they play. If you don't like it, too bad. Just kidding. We, so far, have not gotten enough board action to warrant a different game thread every time we play a different team.

 

[nuraman00]

Note to anyone following along, this year I'm going to try to start a new thread whenever I game starts and that thread will be bumps the next time they play. If you don't like it, too bad. Just kidding. We, so far, have not gotten enough board action to warrant a different game thread every time we play a different team.

That's fine. As long as it results in more comments by you, per season, than in previous years.

 

[nuraman00]

It was a scary game because the Jazz were down for most of it.

 

[nuraman00]

If you go by +/-, the starters weren't good and the bench was.

 

[nuraman00]

So far, through 18 minutes, Joe Ingles is the MVP. It looks like Rodney Hood came off the bench and did OK in the first half.

Bonus points for my speech recognition for getting Joe Ingles name correctly on the first try.

Is Joe Ingles one of the best developed players in Jazz history? Considering where he came from.

That also depends on how you look at Stockton. Malone was great in his first year.

But for Stockton, did the Jazz have to develop him, or was it more of a matter of him getting the right opportunity? People will probably have differing opinions on this.

So basically, I'm trying to think of what players showed the biggest improvement from when the Jazz first acquired them, and which of those players were the Jazz the most responsible for developing?

There will always be some players who needed the right opportunity (either playing time, or fit / system) to show what they could do. Whereas others needed to improve either their skillset, or the mental aspect of the game.

 

[MHSL82]

I should have taken a snapshot of the stats at the half or 18 minute mark. Ingles didn't score any more points after I posted that. But he has six assists so that's good. I don't know how many he had in those 18 minutes.

I'm trying to develop a point system in order to do an MVP of the game I'm going thread, but I'm having difficulty. I want to overvalue assess, undervalue blocks, factor in shooting percentage but that's impossible, etc.

I initially thought about taking the percentage of a field goal, three point shot, or free-throw and assigning it a value but then somebody who shot 12% from the free-throw line would score more than somebody who did not shoot any free throws at all. So that would not work. I could have a percentage that I had as expected, for example I could say 70% free-throw shooting is the expectancy. Shoot 87.5%, that's good. Shoot 60%, it's not.

But that's too much upkeep. I want to just put it on an Excel sheet and have it figured out which I could, but then I know that sometime in the season I would second-guess and want to reevaluate the numbers and while I could do that easily on the computer, ehh.

What's your idea? One point for one point, 1.1 points for offensive rebound and one point for defensive? Or are offensive rebounds much more important so it should be 1.25? How about for steals? Should blocks be more important because they are on shots? Or less important because they could've missed a shot anyway? There's more chance of being in the right place at the right time for a steel in there is for block, in my opinion, even though centers just "happened to be" in the right place for blocks.

How about for shots made, would you give access points for each made a field goal and add some value for three point makes? It's already accounted for in the points but it could be sort of like extra credit.

Nuraman - before you go crazy, I'm not doing it accumulated rating system. It would simply be a factor in these points whoever has the highest score I would give the MVP for the game and then second, third etc. Then I would add up all the points from that at the end of the season. I know there's the eye test and there's a feel test, but I really can't watch every game.

I had troubles because my first attempt at putting points in, had Ingles as the MVP for yesterday. 11 points doesn't seem quite MVP especially when someone else had 10 assists.

 

[MHSL82]

Great game. We got 10 assists, six assists, four assists, and four assists, for a total of 28 for the team. We also shot over 50% from the field. Oh, and we won.

 

[MHSL82]

The Jazz have the best record in the NBA right now.

 

[nuraman00]

I should have taken a snapshot of the stats at the half or 18 minute mark. Ingles didn't score any more points after I posted that. But he has six assists so that's good. I don't know how many he had in those 18 minutes.

I'm trying to develop a point system in order to do an MVP of the game I'm going thread, but I'm having difficulty. I want to overvalue assess, undervalue blocks, factor in shooting percentage but that's impossible, etc.

I initially thought about taking the percentage of a field goal, three point shot, or free-throw and assigning it a value but then somebody who shot 12% from the free-throw line would score more than somebody who did not shoot any free throws at all. So that would not work. I could have a percentage that I had as expected, for example I could say 70% free-throw shooting is the expectancy. Shoot 87.5%, that's good. Shoot 60%, it's not.

But that's too much upkeep. I want to just put it on an Excel sheet and have it figured out which I could, but then I know that sometime in the season I would second-guess and want to reevaluate the numbers and while I could do that easily on the computer, ehh.

What's your idea? One point for one point, 1.1 points for offensive rebound and one point for defensive? Or are offensive rebounds much more important so it should be 1.25? How about for steals? Should blocks be more important because they are on shots? Or less important because they could've missed a shot anyway? There's more chance of being in the right place at the right time for a steel in there is for block, in my opinion, even though centers just "happened to be" in the right place for blocks.

How about for shots made, would you give access points for each made a field goal and add some value for three point makes? It's already accounted for in the points but it could be sort of like extra credit.

Nuraman - before you go crazy, I'm not doing it accumulated rating system. It would simply be a factor in these points whoever has the highest score I would give the MVP for the game and then second, third etc. Then I would add up all the points from that at the end of the season. I know there's the eye test and there's a feel test, but I really can't watch every game.

I had troubles because my first attempt at putting points in, had Ingles as the MVP for yesterday. 11 points doesn't seem quite MVP especially when someone else had 10 assists.

Let me think about it, and I'll come up with the MHSL82 formula for Game MVPs.

 

[nuraman00]

The Jazz have the best record in the NBA right now.

There is also a similar phrase you can vocalize with harmony.