Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from videoburns. Show videoburns's posts

    Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers

    In Response to Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers:
    In 2008 the Celts averaged 42.0 rpg in the regular season. The Celts also averaged 100.5 ppg.  In 2009 the Celts averaged 42.1 rpg and 100.9 ppg. In 2010 the Celts averaged 38.6 rpg and 99.2 ppg. In 2011 the Celts averaged 38.8 rpg and 96.5 ppg. Clearly the evidence shows as the Celts got lesser rebounds, the Celts also scored lesser points. It's a good thing Ainge addressed this problem by getting younger this coming season.  I wouldn't be surprised if the Celts get more rebounds and score more points as Rondo and the young guys will be able to fastbreak more.  
    Posted by Fiercest34

    The only thing clear is that you (Fierce) have no clue about how to read statistics. 

    AND you left out 2012 because it even further undercuts the logic of your fetish. 


    2008-2009   42.1 rebs    100.9 ppg
    2009-2010   38.6 rebs     99.2 ppg
    2010-2011   38.8 rebs     96.5 ppg
    2011-2012   38.8 rebs     91.8 ppg

    Between 2009 and 2010 C's rebounding decreased by substantial 8.3%  yet their points per game decreased just 1.6%

    Between 2010 and 2011 C's rebounding actually INCREASED by .5% while their PPG DECREASED by 2.7%    (This is a significant move  in the opposite direction that Fierce Rebound Fetish  predicts)

    And between 2011 and 2012 C's rebounding was unchanged yet their PPG decreased by a hefty 4.8%.   (This clearly indicates that factors other than rebounds per game have a stronger effect on ppg)   


    The Celtics rpg and ppg statistics for 2010 2011 and 2012 do NOT show a strong correlation between rpg and ppg...      and these statistics provide NO support for the causal link that the Fierce Rebound Fetish asserts. 

    What this evidence shows is that Fierce can't see the forrest for the trees.
    Good Night!


     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from videoburns. Show videoburns's posts

    Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers

    In Response to Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers:
    Clearly the evidence shows as the Celts got lesser rebounds, the Celts also scored lesser points. 
    Posted by Fiercest34


    Since you seemed to miss the point of my post I assume it was too complicated for you to follow....  so I will simplify....


    2008-2009   42.1 rebs    100.9 ppg
    2009-2010   38.6 rebs     99.2 ppg
    2010-2011   38.8 rebs     96.5 ppg
    2011-2012   38.8 rebs     91.8 ppg

    These numbers DO NOT show that "..as celts got .lesser rebounds celts got lesser points." 

    The only thing clear is that you (Fierce) have no clue about how to read statistics. 
     
    What this evidence shows is that Fierce can't see the forrest for the trees.
    Good Night!
    Now please go away like you promised.   pledged....  Gave your word....   
    Because we all know .....  a man is only as good as his word.  

    and these days, your word hits new lows every day.        



     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from videoburns. Show videoburns's posts

    Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers

    In Response to Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers:
    In Response to Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers : You're supposed to be 31 years old and you're making assumptions that we can never know the answer to. How sure are you that McDyess will turn out the way you want him to if he became a Celtic? The only way you would know how McDyess would turn out if he were a Celtic is if you're clairvoyant! Just because a player averages a certain number for a team it doesn't automatically mean he'll do the same if the Celts got him. That's common sense!
    Posted by Fiercest34




    projecting that DcDyess will get x number of rebounds because that is what he had done over his whole career is THE SAME as projecting that the celts can't beat the Lakers in a championship series unless the get 40 rebs during the3 season.....     

    You are an illogical boy... especially when it comes to defending your Rebound Fetish.....

    now please go away .... you embarrass yourself every post you make here....   you dishonor your family ...     do your parents know about you renigging on your bet..... is it something you admit to your friends?    or is it your little private secret badness?....
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from videoburns. Show videoburns's posts

    Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers

    In Response to Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers:
    In Response to Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers : Guess what? rame is the one who said McDyess will get x number of rebounds because that is what he has done over his whole career. I'm not the one who brought up McDyess. You really want to talk about dishonoring your family? How about going to 2006, when LaFrentz was still a Celtic, just to find a game where the Celts beat the Lakers even when the Lakers had the rebounding advantage. HAHAHA!!!
    Posted by Fiercest34




    try to follow this....      I know that rame brought up McDyess, and used the projection of McDyess' rebs in his argument...      YOU rejected the projections as somehow invalid....            MY point is that the McDyess projections are the SAME  as the Fierce Fetish predictions that the Celts cant win without 40....    They are BOTH predictions based on past performance.   

    And you can't read it slowly enough to make the connection - or appreciate the irony  of your own blinderd vision.      

    There is nothing dishonets about 2006...     Did I hide or falsify the  date?,,,    and btw I went back to 2006 because you made the stupid assertion that the Celts could NEVER beat the lakers if they don't out rebound them.       
    Can you really not see the difference between using a statistic that you think is not relevant to an arguement and renigging on a bet and a promise?   Breaking your word?      Really? that is the same in your eyes?   
             
    Please stop,,, it is getting harder and harder to think of you as a person worth conversing with.

     
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers

    In Response to Re: Breaking Down the Rebounding Numbers:
    Say the Celtics signed Antonio McDyess with the MLE over Sheed in '09 as I would have rather they done at the time. In 21 mins he avg's 5.9 reb's a game (playoffs 24.7/6.8) In 22.5 mins Rasheed Wallace avg's 4.1 reb's (playoffs 17.1/3.0) Well with McD on our team over Sheed we average 40.4 boards a game. Yet when Perk went down Rasheed came up with a 36 minute, 11 point 8 rebound effort. McDyess only had 1 game in 11 those playoffs where he put up those #'s, a 12/10 in a 16 point loss to PHX. The Suns didn't have the frontcourt that LA did. Was he going to change the 13 total and 15 offensive rebound disparity in that game 7? So right there, you take away the guy who sat behind the 3 point line, put a a vet known for his toughness and rebounding (avg'd 12 per over his career) in his place and the outcome is likely the same. But take away the demoralizing effects of losing your starting center in the opening mins of game 6, and seeing your best shooter go 0-8 in a game 3 you should have won and 4-28 overall from 3 after his leg bruise... and it is completely different... you can't be 100% sure those Celtics would have pulled it out... but you can be pretty confident, and darn sure that injuries were more a reason C's lost then the BS Fierce is trying to pull about them not being a 40 rebound team that year
    Posted by rameakap


    what are you doing writing screeds about mcdyess coming here three years ago?

    how about someone other than aortic valve replacement victims being the major frontcourt signings this year???? 

    fierce- we get "younger"- has nothing to do with rebounds.  it was more than obvious this team needed big time frontcourt help coming into this offseason.  garnett played great but ran out of gas and can't do it himself.  so what do we do?  we get rid of steamer and sign jason collins?  re-sign wilcox and green who are just question marks and we're supposed to believe that sallinger and melo are going to contribute to this front court in the event that the green/wilcox gamble doesn't work?

    or does this all lay with blandone bass?  his per minute rebounding has been on the slide since he left dallas....  it's not like we were stoked with rebounders here last year- everyone was begging for him to get the windex out and do it but he turned in a WORSE per minute rebounding performance than he did playing along side duh wight howard in ORL!!!

    so did we get a big man coach to try to reverse the horrible footwork trends of bass and he's suddenly going to average 8 boards a game per 32 minutes played instead of 5.X?

    i mean maybe i could rationalize this, fierce, if we added a slasher type with a nose for rebounds, in the 6-5 to 6-7 range.  but all that fits that description is jeff green, a below average rebounder BEFORE heart surgery...

    honestly, let's just call it for what it is here.  i support this team but there is nothing in the frontcourt that i see that is a solid upgrade over last year.  if anything we have lost shot blocking ability- steamer was a leauge leading per minute played swat guy, with all of his other issues of course, but he made a difference when he was in there.  collins won't do that.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share