In case you havent noticed, I really blow my stack when I hear/read that we have no closers and that other teams do. Then of course people love to go into list of great closers.
I know its B.S. and that 1) we close out games just fine and 2) other teams great closers arent so great. I just know it.
But I needed a rough and ready group of stats, so that I could be corrected. I found a pretty good site - 82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm
It only goes up to 09 but we get a pretty good sample.
So without any further ado here are the list of closers that we have to have to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
Well I would love to have Ray Allen for that last second shot, wouldnt you? But at 15 for 39 for a .385 pct, that isnt a very good choice. Knockdown FT shooter only makes 4 out of 6 with 1 assist and 2 turnovers. Stinks, no?
His team mate Paul Pierce would be much better, no? Well, no, not really. At 11 for 32 this all time closer only connects on .344 of his shots. He does a good job of going to the line, making 15 of 17 FTs and dishing out 9 assists though he undoes some of that with 3 turnovers.
How about that tremendous offensive player, in his prime years, Tracy McGrady? Wouldnt he be great as a closer? Well he has hit for 9 FGs. Unfortunately he's had 32 attempts for a % of .281. He has drawn enough fouls to take 8 FTs and making all 8. Then he added an unremarkable 3 assists and 1 turnover.
On Miami, hey we all know that LBJ is not a very good clutch player but Wade, well, there we really have a Jerry West like talent who is unstoppable on that last shot. Surely Wade would show us what a closer does, right? Well, no, not really. Wade hits on 11 for 40 for a pretty crappy % of .275. He has gotten to the line pretty often making 13 but he has missed 4 times. He also has a pretty ordinary 3 assists and 2 turnovers. Not that good overall.
Why not move to the cream of the crop? How about last years hero, Dirk Nowitzki? Well, at 12 for 37 for a .324 success rate, Dirk doesnt look to be that all world. He has drawn some fouls hitting 13 but he's also missed 5 shots in that last 10 seconds for a pretty average FT rate. The 1 assist doesnt impress especially when you factor in 3 turnovers.
So maybe we have to move up a notch to the player I consider the greatest PF of all time. Tim Duncan has 9 FGs but in 23 attempts he only sports a .391. His 6 for 7 at the line is OK and, just like Timmee, he would have more assists (3) than turnovers (1). But really nothing special.
How about going to a former fave here in Denver. How about Melo? Well Melo does impress by making 13 out of 27 for a .481. But really thats only a little above his lifetime % and above the league wide %. He's also only made 7 out of 11 FTs with 1 assist and 4 turnovers. It seems like its about 50% success rate, maybe less. Is that anything to lust after?
I got it. Why dont we bring in Mr Big Shot himself? Chauncey Billups we all know is a cinch in these situations. Unfortunately the ghastly 6 for 37 gives him a frightening .162 rate that is only leavened by the very good 18 for 19 at the line. No surprise he would tally more assists (6) than turnovers (2). Success rate seems to be at about 33%, nothing to really to brag about.
But if we only had the Michael Jordan of this era, the great Kobe Bryant. How could you miss? Well maybe you couldnt miss but he did, plenty of times as his 14 for 56 shows. Any math genius could see that that is a 25% FG% barely aided by the 12 FTs in 15 attempts which are somewhat messed up by the 1 assist (a shock, really) and 5 turnovers.
But still for years to come, you'll have to read and hear how small market teams without "superstars" cannot hope to compete because they, we, dont have closers. Just grin and bear it. Me, I just throw darts at the TV because, unlike Elvis, I dont own a pistol.
Write respectfully of your SB Nation community and yourself.
6 recs | 106 comments
excellent post
And spot on with the data. Rec’d
Kevin #3 - February 13, 2012
i think its its more that we dont
have a “go to” guy who score to stop another team’s run…we really don’t yet have a proven give me the rock in crunch time guy…doesn’t have to be last shot to be a closer
LEEDS - February 18, 2012 via Android app
thats a pretty reasonable position LEEDS
I think its up to coaching to nurture guys like that. But still, I think that the “stopper” could be the team like it is at closing time.
sgiustra - February 19, 2012
if u want it to be team stopper
then u need to develop a half cort offense…i for one, hope gallo becomes the go to guy…
LEEDS - February 19, 2012 via Android app
Rec'd
Really appreciate your bringing the FACTS about “closers” to our attention.
That said, I still believe the Nuggets need a rugged scorer on the roster. Not for “closing,” but for getting shots at the basket when the going gets tough.
Of course, a half-court offense with actual plays would help, as well.
LongWindedHank - February 14, 2012
Nothing grinds my gears more than people that are paid to be knowledgable about basketball repeat the complete fallacy that kobe is the best "closer" in the game.
And it’s not just clutch shooting percentage as you have given here. The lakers (before this year at least) perennially had one of the most efficient offenses in the league. But in crunch-time situations they become mediocre at best (even comparing to other offenses in crunch-time situations). This is because they would stop running the triangle and switch to the Kobe hero-ball offense. Unfortunately I don’t have the stats handy, but it’s true.
In other words, I would say that Kobe is about the last guy you want on the floor in crunch-time, because you know that you are getting nothing but a bunch of turnovers and bad shots. That he is better than most at hitting those shots doesn’t change that they are bad.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
oh no, you and i are saying
bad things about Kobe-in-the-Clutch. The mythmakers are going to come after us. Be careful.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
All you need to read is this
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time
georgekarl - February 14, 2012
thank you
I heard one of abbott’s podcasts to this effect, didn’t know about the article. Everyone paid to write or talk about basketball should read this.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
There was an even better one that included radar charts. I'm still looking for it.
georgekarl - February 14, 2012
a double thanks
please Stiffs, for the love of everything that is good, please refrain from the closer argument until you’ve read that ESPN article
Ironically a buried article at ESPN pretty much tries to undo the propaganda that the rest of ESPN constantly puts on display. The article is right but no way is it going to change the minds that SportsCenter mis-shapes.
Oh, and wish you’d have pointed to article before so I would not have had to write a post:)
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
oh and I guess Abbott is still writing on this issue just recently adding...
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/36814/kobe-bryant-kills-crunch-time
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
I saw an interview with Big Al after the grammys
When they asked him who is the guy who should get the ball in the last few seconds of the game he said “I don’t know but I’m practicing that shot in case its me.”
georgekarl - February 14, 2012
Al's a pretty good choice to take that last shot because he doesnt think
and I mean that in a good way
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Yeah I have no problem with him taking the shot.
Maybe AAA and Ty as well.
love4nuggets - February 14, 2012
really? really? see the Laker games!
Mancar - February 14, 2012
I cant
what happened?
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Al Harrington 2 missed contested threes
Mancar - February 14, 2012
mmmm
so Al’s not nearly perfect?
In the Laker games didnt Kobe miss shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after shot after ?
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
but he got the shots that counted
Mancar - February 14, 2012
he also missed shots that counted
your turn…
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
if they won how did he miss the shots that counted?
Mancar - February 14, 2012
mmmmm maybe we're talking different things
I recall Ks missing many many shots against us this year. All shots count. That 3rd game was marred by us losing Moz when we just went up 3.
I dont recall Kobe beating us with crunch shots. Am I wrong?
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
I think when they say "a closer"
They refer to a guy you only want to have the ball in the last 5 minutes and have him do magic with one on one isolations because the defense tightens up in the last 5 minutes and thus it is harder to roll with the things that work at the start of a game like Pick n Rolls, drives to the lane and your usual fair all tend to be turnover prone in the last 5 minutes in a contested game because defenders switch faster, lanes are clogged and the defense will make you work for your shots. I think that in certain ways, it is very nice to have that guy who can take the ball and play one on one isolations when the defense tightens up because the defense will let you have the one on one isolations since they tend to end up in A. Jump shot or B. a drive and kick to a perimeter player for a three point shot, which only connect under 40% of the time.
CloudBurst - February 14, 2012
yeah, I agree with you Cloudburst
that “they” (you mean, media, right?) say its nice to have THAT guy. Understood. But where is this “magic?” – your word – who exactly has been “magical?”
Hey when we (Nuggets) miss on 2/3 of our closing shots, wouldnt the media be blaring, “Told ya!” over and over. Well, seems to me that the games best “closers” are doing pretty much that and no one is saying “Told ya!” – well I’m saying “Told ya” because …
… no matter how many times ESPN replays Kobe’s game winning shot against the Raptors, no matter how many times they dont add that Kobe missed 6 straight shots before that shot, no matter how many times they fail to tell you that Kobe also missed 1 out of 2 FTs in crunch time, I know, and I remember that Kobe has blown lots of crunch time shots.
And do I even have to go thru list of mediocre players who’ve hit big shots in important games? Fischer, Horry, Kerr, on and on.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
anyone remember this?
I was at this game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IVDDhEEahk
Kobe has hit a lot of game winners because he has taken far more game-winning attempts than anyone-no other reason.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
yup, I know Kobe is good, maybe great but
if I try enough midcourt attempts I will make a pretty good number. The % will suck but the absolute number will be pretty impressive if I take enough attempts
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
I was thinking about the same thing!
you did an amazing research and an exellent post indeed!
it’s great to see how some fans can be much better writers than some writers in the big media… this should read by many more people!
danherb - February 14, 2012
thanks and you dont have to be smart or a good writer to contribute
the key is not to be forced to adhere to media driven, money influenced cliches and false “information”
I know what I’ve seen for years, decades actually, and I know that the true story lines just arent as compelling as the HERO storyline
But, if I want fantasy, I read fantasy and know it is fantasy but when having conversations about sports and players, I like a bit of fact with my personal fantasies, thats all.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Well there is a difference between a closer and a star
We need someone not afraid to take the final shot. Robert Horry, Steve Kerr, and many other role players would take ‘the shot’ in the closing minutes. We can develop that guy but as it stands right now everyone looks lost in the final minutes waiting for someone else to make that shot.
On the other hand playing odd line ups at the end of the game don’t help us. Karl needs to move on from the 3 guard line up with 0 rebounding and interior defense. It forces us to double down low or to try to front the post
remyrems - February 14, 2012
no, we dont look lost
disagree entirely
We look somewhere about average. It seems like our “lost” players do about as well as other teams “great” closers.
My point is that the prism that we are forced to view last second shots, makes or misses. When we have last second success, we are lost – when Kobe has last second failure he is, what? What is THAT exactly?
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
that is "makes or misses determines how we see it, how we understand it"
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Going to below post
I do agree. Last shot isn’t what I was referring to. More so the final minutes. I agree with Fly that no one seems to create those points to go tit for tat. Our closing defense has me worried lately…I feel that our lineup in the last 4-5 minutes is determental to the team defense.
remyrems - February 14, 2012
I actually think there have been a couple games where we looked "lost" in crunch time
memphis and portland come to mind. Those were games where we had late leads, made a few mistakes, the other team hit a couple 3s, and suddenly the wheels came off and execution went out the window. I think those are cases of a young team tightening up and that’s where remy has a point. However, in games that were already close heading into the home stretch we have been fine.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
but rainbow, your supposed to fail at something where normally you only hit about on half the attempts anyway
Its the “lost” part that kind of irritates me. We’ve also looked pretty “found” like against the 6ers and, with our starting frontcourt out, against the Pacers.
I mean great as MJ was, you know he made < half his shots but wed dont really emphasize the half off shots.
BTW we’ve also looked lost in some 1st quarters, 2nd and 3rd too. So what.
Religion’s a tough thing to shed and this closer thing is pretty darn close to religion.
PS I’m not saying you should shed religion just that we usually end up what we started off as regardless of info that is piped in in our lifetime.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
and "info" includes propaganda
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
I'm with you
I said below any team should expect to go around .500 in close games. But I’m citing those two examples as kind of abnormalities. Games that shouldn’t have even been very close in the first place, and everyone started playing bad at once. When actually watching those games it really seemed like a mental breakdown. But you still may be right that it’s mostly coincidental and probably every team has a couple games like that. Let’s just wait and see if it keeps happening.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
A closer ≠ the person taking the last-minute shot
Let’s say the Nuggets have a 10-point lead with 6 minutes left in the fourth quarter and the opposition is playing lockdown defense and suddenly rattled off two fast-break buckets to cut the lead to 6.
Well, the Nuggets need someone who get get some points.
And all too often, the Nuggets pass-first offense hasn’t had anyone it can rely on to get those points consistently. We saw Andre do this against Philly. But we’ve also seen games where no one can get going and the Nuggets settle for jump shots and lose leads.
A closer isn’t just about taking the final shot, it is finding a way, any way, to get points during those tough fourth quarters. This usually means getting to the line.
Fly Agaric - February 14, 2012
yeah, good point that broadens discussion
But I dont have stats on your broader point, Fly. I just cant say.
But I think that the central point is being missed. Seems as if no one has really reliable players to take that last shot. It might be because the offenses go away from what they do best to assure their closer gets that shot.
As for our situation, I agree that there is too much variability as to who we are going to field in crunch time. But that not a no closer, no star issue as much as a bad coaching issue.
Some stars find ways to get to the line, some dont, some knock down FTs, some dont but generally the cold hard stats suggest that the startegy that it is best to just let your star do it, is not the best route to success.
Karl has to firm up his, for lack of a better word, philosophy for how we handle crunch time. My hope is that while Karl be consistent about who to field, he should also do offense – defense switches.
Its clear that Al should be on the court if we have the ball but not necessarily if we are on defense.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Last shot scenarios are overrated
You only get in about 5 to 15 games at most in a 82 game season where it comes down to the final shot, whether to force into overtime or to win the game. Being a true closer finishes the game in the final minutes to a comfortable enough lead in the final 3-5 minutes because most games end up with a 5-9 point differential.
CloudBurst - February 14, 2012
agree, I saw a stat that said that CAnthony has 16 game winning/tieing shots
what they didnt say is how many misses there were.
But even with 16, thats 16 in 7 – 8 years, wherein I’m sure that Anthony took virtually every last second shot (guess Billups took some too, with no great success).
Apart from great memories/images of Anthony, beating this or that team, really has Melo had a great effect on last second shots? I dont think so.
Hey its about 2 such shots a year and I’m not getting into the misses and turnovers. But even taking the positive of 2 makes per year, cant that easily be undone by just a few missed defensive assignments, a bad shooting game, offensive fouls in crunch time?
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
It was either the first or second year of the okc thunders existence
Two different games in the same season Melo hit a 3 pt buzzer beater to win the game.
georgekarl - February 14, 2012
well thats 2 and he's hit more
his success rate is pretty good actually but the spin machine would lead any person to think its almost automatic. Well, maybe with Kobe its almost automatic but you get the picture.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Memphis game
We were rolling in the first half with the double digit lead, because it was easy running the court, the lanes were open and the shots were falling. In the second half, our shots didn’t fall, and they were chipping the lead and finally the final 5 minutes happened.
Memphis still has the same roster that went 2 series’s deep last year in the playoffs, so they have an idea of how to play the pressure defense that you get 48 minutes in good playoff matches. When they realized they had a chance to win the game, they upped their defense, we couldn’t get any set plays working because they all resulted in turnovers, they didn’t allow us to run and it came to a point where the players were looking at each other looking for some sort of spark which never came. Miller tried to do too much, some of the other players didn’t want to be involved and eventually the Memphis defense was too much and suffocated us into a losing effort.
Isolation offense works in situations where you are up a few points with a few minutes to go because, even though it isn’t the most effective offense to run for 3 and a half quarters, it is still going to be efficient as for what it is depending on who the player is.
When Portland had a healthy Brandon Roy, they would play team offense for most of the game and when the defense started to pressure, they would let Roy play one on one ball because even though it wasn’t fully efficient, you knew you were going to get about 45% of your shots made.
So, I think that its important to have a guy you can go to even if its a team’s team. Roy wasn’t a 25-30 PPG player, he was in the 18-22 PPG ball park, and I feel that with out depth we don’t need the 25-30 PPG player, but we do need someone whom if you give the ball to, can effectively score in the final minutes when the ball is in his hands, and I mean that with posting up, one on one dribbling, and the jump shots. I think that Gallo’s talent potential is where Roy was himself when Roy was in his prime and didn’t have a blown knee, in case you felt I was comparing Gallo to a retired player in the current.
CloudBurst - February 14, 2012
agree but again
your concerns are really coaching related.
And I’ll add this, I love Ty but Ty is not as good as Dre is in a half court last second situation because Ty’s strength is his speed, fast breaks, stuff that you dont do in last second, set up scenarios.
Much as I love Ty, in those scenarios I’d rather have Al in for Ty and Dre leading the point.
PS: But if Ty is going guns, he will help us avoid those situation
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Agreed
Lawson tends to suck in clutch moments like Westbrook. Speedy guards don’t seem so effective in the final minute of a very close game.
CloudBurst - February 14, 2012
I think Gallo can be that Closer.
We’ve got to be a little patient with him. My concern though is that he could settle for the three-pointer in clutch situations or worse – draw a charge on a reckless drive to the hoop.
But, I think he may be on the path to being the guy who can take the ball with the game on the line and create a good situation – whether it’s free throws, an and-one on a drive, or in some situations the long jump shot.
I just feel like we need to be patient with these young guys. There’s plenty of developing talent on the roster, and I think with Gallo there are the other intangibles as well..
Alaskan4Fat - February 14, 2012
I could see Gallo being our "closer" but please dont lose sight of the thrust of this post
“Great” closers arent that great.
If Gallo hits some clutch shots, great but I dont really want to see Gallo iso playing in crunch time because it will only be occasionally successful, you know, like it is for Pierce, Dirk, Timmy and Kobe.
I want to do better and we can do better than roughly a 33% success rate, in fact I think we’ve done better already.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
i have a solution!
be so far ahead at the end of games that it doesnt matter
Kevin #3 - February 14, 2012
yeah because
your chances of winning toss ups are, give or take an inch, a toss up
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
When referring to closer, one must also take into account the system in which they play
If you don’t think we need one of these “closers” that is okay. But there is a reason we cannot win close games. And when we have close games the truth is YOU NEED someone to pull the trigger and MAKE the shots. If you are content with Big Al taking reverse fade away three pointers to win a game then by all means continue to be content. Thats fine if you don’t believe that we need a go to guy at the end of a game, that mentality will prevail until the playoffs. But I’ll come back and talk to you when we face an OKC or Dallas or Clipper team in the playoffs. Its funny that you argue against Kobe, Duncan, Chauncey, Dirk, and Wade, seeing as they all have rings. They must’ve done something right! The truth is I would take any of those players because their good outweighs their bad. And if you are saying you wouldn’t want any of these players then you must be okay with being continually kicked out of the first round. Its true much of that occured with Melo, but this team has PROVEN to not be able to execute in crunch time. We are not going to blow out teams in the playoffs, the games will come down to the home stretch, as a fan that should bother you because this team struggles when slowed down.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
"They must’ve done something right! "
mancar, you are on to something here
The greats have done somethings right.
1) Be on talented teams
2) Be consistent
3) Not have many games that could be decided by a shot, a rebound, a bad call
the last one is the key because even bad teams will win their share of games if the games are shortened. Remember how bad college teams would stall when there was no shot clock. Why? They wanted the game to depend on a few possessions because then anyone can win, almost.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Their are many reasons for close games.
but the fact is that these situations happen more often than not in the playoffs. You don’t need a superstar you need a finisher, someone or some people you can insert into games when its crunch time. You could argue that we have all three of your points but when the time comes we need someone to take those shots. I have faith that Wilson Chandler will create a new lineup that will be awesome down the stretch. I;m gald you posted these statistics, but the “superstar” model has proven to win championships. I don’t think that is what we need, in fact Im glad we don’t have that model. I hope and pray that we will have someone with the confidence to take the big shot, but the fact remains Pierce, Allen, Duncan, Kobe, Chauncey, Dirk etc, finished games and thus made their teams better.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
"we close out games just fine"- Not true
San Antonio, Memphis, Clippers, Lakers (x2), the first Portland game, NOLA. These are games we DIDN’T close out “fine”. Yes you can blame it on Coaching but the other half has to produce as well. When a team continually misses shots, the other team is bound to take advantage of that.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
but i think coaching has a direct effect on the players production
having a small lineup means that they have to fight harder for every rebound instead of allowing one of the 7 footers get it. it means that they dont have a big presence in the paint to have your back, so you have to resort to doubling and trying to adjust to cross court passes which is exhausting. it means mismatches on defense that don’t reap rewards on the offensive end. im fine with going small for stretches, even for a majority of a game, but i think when it slows down, we need to have a better lineup on the floor
Kevin #3 - February 14, 2012
As do I, but to state that we don't need a closer is misguided
I agree that Karls lineups do not do us justice, but you have to play with the cards you are dealt. All of the games I had mentioned were winable. but the matter of discussion is based on having a closer(s) or go to guys when these types of games are on the line. There are reasons that we are in these types of situations but all the blame cannot go to the coach (a majority but not all of it). When we have these situations having someone that continually attacks and finds/hits shots is not a bad thing.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
i agree that not all of the blame goes to GK
if the players execute, there wouldnt be any problems. but remember that the guys that we expect to be our closers (Gallo, Ty, AAA, possibly Chandler) are all fairly young. I dont think any of the guys listed above were capable of closing games at 23-25 years old. They haven’t developed the confidence and the know how for it yet. I think that all of our young guys could develop into the closer roll, but I do think it will take time for them to step up and accept it.
Kevin #3 - February 14, 2012
mancar, its too long an explanation but your argument is circular and in some ways misguided
heres an example. You are getting on our team because they lose close games, perhaps lose more close ones than we win.
But you are not accounting for something. When we are healthy and playing well, many of our wins are by comfortable margins. But our losses are usually by small margins because we are good.
If we started to win the overwhelming number of close games and continue to win many comfortably, we’d be winning 90% of our games. But we are not THAT good, at least not yet.
You are taking a positive and turning it into a negative.
Thats kind of like saying “I just won a million dollars but shit I now have to pay taxes on it.”
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Agreed but what I am also saying is
that we will not be winning by “comfortable margins” in the playoffs. It is the same story year after year. I have the luxury of being negative upon what you suppose to be a positive because these “positives” have continually kicked us out of the playoffs. If you are never completely satisfied with the outcome that means it is not in its best form. I love the Nuggets, more than any franchise, so I don’t see it as a negative to point out faults
Mancar - February 14, 2012
by "we" I'm only concerned with the post melo nugs because thats where I came onboard
Our real fault is that we are not great. We lost to OKC because we were not as good and not as healthy.
We need to work on this. KD is better than anyone on our team in crunch time. He’s also better than anyone on our team in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd quarter.
Pointing out areas of weakness is good but I believe you’re just relaying non facts that the media continually parrots.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
I don't care about the media,
for those of us that have been watching the nuggets way before melo, tendecies develop first hand, at the games. I don’t care if the media SAYS we need a finisher, seeing the team up close (including on the road) shows the signs of a team with a long way to go. Don’t mistake me for a fool because firsthand account goes farther than anything facts will prove.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
then I respect your take
and though I disagree on this particular issue, generally IMO your opinions are pretty well thought out. In no way do I think you are a foll.
In fact (backhanded compliment alert:)) that you could make a pretty compelling argument on an issue that IIMO you are just mistaken on is pretty impressive to me wait, Im just digesting your last sentence …
“firsthand account goes farther than anything facts will prove”
I didnt even get thru my compliment until that last piece just hit me.
Are you saying that your first hand account is more important than facts? Just need a clarification.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
im telling you I've witnessed a single player take over a game
I’ve seen Kobe look at his teammates and decide he was going to do this himself. He stood far and away and did not say anything to fellow players, he just stood and watched the opposing bench as if he were looking to see which sucker he was going to hit the game winner over. I’ve seen Kevin Durant unexplainably get hot and nail jumper after jumper knowing each one is going in. I’ve seen Rasheed Wallace hit a three pointer from halfcourt after stealing a inbound pass to force overtime and win a game against the nuggets. And before he did that he SHUT DOWN the Nuggets offense. Facts only go so far. The facts you stated are variables through a variety of games. You know what doesn’t cross a players mind when he has a game to close. FACTS. he goes out and just does what he has to do. He doesnt care that he is 33% or some crap like that, he bends the flow of the game to his game. So yes I am telling you that my FIRST HAND accounts are more important than your facts. Its a good thing that you do not own a pistol cause your shooting blanks.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
you can turn a reply into a tome
you can yell in your adamancy
I can respect most everything you post, and I do
but you will never convince me that your subjective “facts” are better than THE facts, the numbers.
1/4 success is 25% no matter how you dice it up
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
cool
than we shall agree to disagree
Mancar - February 14, 2012
does it say if these games were playoff or regular games?
Mancar - February 14, 2012
they do that too
I just stuck to regular season in part because I wanted as much data as possible
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
so than your facts are only looking at seasons in which these teams ran away with their respective playoff seedings?
Mancar - February 14, 2012
IDK
its based on the regular season of several years
Whether the respective teams of players in question ran away with seedings, IDK.
I’m also not sure of how many of the last second shots were during full moons.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
I mean
how complicated do you want to make this
Just look at the stats.
If the stats had the success rates at 75% wouldnt you say that your position is affirmed?
Then why doesnt it work in reverse if the success rates are low?
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
by simply stating facts is not enough
I know better than that because my background is in research science. So just because you average out a numerical value of a stat doesn’t make it that much more impressive. Each stat has a variable and even within these variables there are central measures of tendency. You can spit stats and percentages all day, it wont be enough to sway me. 75% wouldn’t impress me. I know what I SEE. Complication arose when you introduced the stats at the beginning of your post. When i see stats I immediately go back to my training and that is to be able to explain both sides of phenomena. I get your side, I just feel that the other side deserves an advocate as well.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I’m screaming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The other side has a billion advocates. My side has a couple of geeks whose research is usually buried on websites.
Youre on the “winning” side, no real need to add more brainpower to it
My side will never ever take the day because there is no moolah to be made on that side.
Also, i appreciate your tenacity and knowledge of research but my background is in behaviour, perception, emotions – ie psychology – and I know for a fact that we all see what we are trained to see and what we want to see.
Thats everyone, me, you, everybody. With all my training, all my experience, I have to check myself all the time
sgiustra - February 15, 2012
I'm in agreement
The line up of Ty/Miller/Fernandez or Afflalo/Harrington/Nene isn’t good enough deensively to hold a lead. They can create some offense and I like it for stretches. But when we need a stop or need a rebound this line up should not be on the floor
remyrems - February 14, 2012
yep, I say
offense, defense depending on what side of ball we’re on in crunch time
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
i think that regardless of what side we are on
until the timeout battles occur in the last minute or so it should be
Moz/Kouf
Nene
Gallo
AAA
Ty
An actual lineup. And put it out there consistently so they gain familiarity and comfort in these type of situations
Kevin #3 - February 14, 2012
the other lakers game, milwaukee, philly, washington, new york
all tight games that we won. You should expect to go around .500 in close games, almost by definition. Teams that do significantly better are more lucky than clutch and almost certainly regress to the mean in following years (I don’t have stats to back this up).
By the way, this will happen with OKC this year. They are not quite as good as their record.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
thanks for putting in the work that I really did not have the energy to do
So it seems we have won lots of close games
And your surmise on reason for some teams perform great in close games is as good an explanation as any I’ve ever heard.
Regression to the mean is a very important statistical concept and applies here. If you would be so kind please explain to Stiffs who dont care about research analysis and apply to present discussion.
Your application to OKC is very provocative.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
won't go into too much detail
but if the outcome of some process has a degree of randomness, than whatever outcome you get in one trial, you should expect the next trial to produce an outcome closer to the average.
eg if you flip a coin 10 times and get heads 9 times, you would obviously still expect less than 9 heads over the next 10 flips. (note: what regression to the mean does not mean is that you should expect a high number of tails in the next 10 flips-that’s called the gamblers fallacy).
So, if you buy that, say, a tie game with 2 minutes left is as good as a coin flip (which even I think may be slightly overstating it), than a team that is 8-2 in such situations is not clutch, just lucky, and you still expect something like 5-5 over the next 10. OKC is something like 10-2 in games decided by 5 or less points. There may be some degree of KD clutchness there, but no way it accounts for 10-2. And if OKC is still .780 or above by season’s end I will eat my hat.
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
thats for the more brainiacal folks. For the rest of us ...
If two beautiful parents have a child, chances are the child will be closer to normal looking than the 2 beautiful parents.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
also,
if you buy into this kind of reasoning, it bodes very ill for one Mr. Tebow….
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
Tight game
You are correct at the end these games were all tight. But in most of those games we had a larger lead that was dwindled away in the last 5-6 minutes of a game due to second short oppertunities, poor rotations, defensive switches, or the dreaded sit at the 3 point line offense.
We held on to these games, but allowed them to be a lot closer then they should’ve been. You can’t win all these games by double digits but I dislike the pattern I see lately in letting late leads slip away.
remyrems - February 14, 2012
i think all of this is fixable
by having Nene at PF and Moz/Kouf in at C. Adds more size for rebounding. Adds a paint threat (for the people who dont think Moz or Kouf are a threat in the paint, rewatch Moz’s hard foul on Blake and remember how the game went after that). And this allows a more balanced attack on offense.
Kevin #3 - February 14, 2012
my biggest concern is
injuries, pure and simple. Healthy we could battle anyone.
And, we have enough of an issue with injuries that I would hope that the front office is working on how to keep our players healthy.
Yes a few of these injuries are freaky but many may be occurring because of some error or oversight on our part.
So we’ve kept AAA pretty healthy by doing something vis a vis his hammy. Now we have to do something about Moz’s ankle – new shoe? basic instruction on how not to goofily spraining your ankle? how to protect your lower leg during an floor melee?
Gallo has had shit with his foot, toe, ankle. Maybe some workout regiment that strengthens muscles? Footwear? Something, please.
Nene, I dont even know where his heel problems resulted from.
Point? There are way more injuries than you should expect. Prvention should be front and center on any discussion regarding improving team going forward.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
in the case of LA, Milwaukee, and Washington
I don’t think that’s true. I recall all of those games being close throughout. I didn’t see the Philly and NY games. did we blow late leads in those?
Rainbow skyline - February 14, 2012
Facing the same team in a series will show your faults.
I agree a healthy team is formidable. A team will eventually figure your tendencies out. But to allude to the fact that we are an elite team is far-fetched (as it stands)
Mancar - February 14, 2012
we're not elite
just talented, compelling, developing. But if we dont develop a Center and Gallo doesnt become consistent, and AAA doesnt bounce back, we will not be a real contender, just a team that scares other teams.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
this season
i think we will be memphis from last year. make it out of the first round and give a great second round performance. that said, i also thing that with this years development and a normal year/training camp next year and masai at the helm, we will be even more dangerous next year
Kevin #3 - February 14, 2012
GREAT assessment of the Nuggets
And as you would likely also say if you had remembered to, let’s add in the potential for Chandler to return and contribute significantly to the proceedings.
FWIW, I doubt we’ll actually become that contender until next year or the next, if contender means a true threat to win the championship.
LongWindedHank - February 14, 2012
apparently
Masai & Josh were both on record at the beginning of this season as saying they don’t think the Nuggets are a contender this year — “We’re one player away,” or something to that effect.
ParkHillNative - February 15, 2012
I keep seeing this quote
but no citation. Can you find one? Would love to see a link to the source. It seems a bit like George saying he’ll be fine with going 5-5 over the next ten (which he actually did say, eh?): why on earth would management say anything other than, “We’ve fielded a very good team, and we hope things go great.”???
LongWindedHank - February 15, 2012
sorry, I have no link
Jeremy on RMC posted it sometime last week. I asked him for more detail, and he just said that both Josh & Masai were on record saying it during radio interviews.
I actually don’t have a problem with it, as compared to the GK quote. I’d rather hear them being honest, while at the same time letting us know that a championship contender is what they’re trying to put together.
In years past, it seemed like the FO never had much to say, and Stan would say nothing at all, and it kind of seemed like the goal was just to put a fairly competitive product on the floor, make the playoffs, and anything after that was just gravy. I mention this here a lot, but remember the whole debacle with the WWE during the ‘09 playoffs? Stan had given them use of the Pepsi Center in late May, and then all of a sudden, it was “Oops, sorry guys, you have to reschedule your event, the Nuggets advanced in the playoffs.” It was embarrassing. They scheduled that WWE event because they figured the Nugs would lose in the first round again, and they were fine with that, that was the plan. Chauncey spoiled the plan by leading the team to the Conference Finals. Stan didn’t particularly want the team to get there, it caused him a problem.
So yeah, at least now the GM and the nominal owner are saying “We’re trying to build a contender.”
ParkHillNative - February 16, 2012
I'll leave Josh aside for now but Masai
may say things for effect or as a strategy or maybe just be dead wrong
Take your pick for what happened when he said we got “killed” on the Gallo trade.
sgiustra - February 16, 2012
Hi Hank, just caught what you said about Chandler
and as you might know, I hype up Will as if he were an MVP candidate. One reason that I didnt is that I dont want Stiffs to call me LongWinded, or I should say, LongWindedest
sgiustra - February 16, 2012
I will love to hear your argument if this team says the same, come playoff time.
Mancar - February 14, 2012
excuses?
Injuries (a sure thing)
Not as good
Refs
the biggest reason for loss, George Karl
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Good job of promoting discussion!
Mancar - February 14, 2012
thanks
and excuse any untoward sounding comments. In my head, I’m always arguing with my aggressive friends in the school yard. But I’ve come a long way.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
printed word is a hard medium because it SEEMS impersonal and rude.
Your good, IMO if your not making people think, then your post is flawed. Good work
Mancar - February 14, 2012
I think that the central point is being missed by some readers
the main point is not that WE are great in closing games. The main point is that supposed great closers arent that great.
By extension, it makes our closers look not so bad. But I know we have lots of room for improvement. Thats not in dispute.
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Can you tell us your opinion on how teams in general, and the Nuggets in particular,
can become more effective at a) winning games, and b) closing games when necessary? it should go without saying that we’d want your opinion to be informed—and particularly so by your excellent original post.
LongWindedHank - February 14, 2012
Oh, KFH, I'm blushing,
no no please everyone, just be patient and I shall look your way
I’ll take a shot at this
1) Make personnel adjustments without fear of hurting players feelings. Do offense/defense switches. Tell players where they fit in. No surprises. Only change when you need to.
2) Have 2 – 3 bread and butter plays that you attach a couple of options to in crunch time
3) Coach has to learn players individual psyches and put in players who are dont feel pressure and nurture future closers. Coach has to be an amateur psychologist.
4) Instill in team the basic fact that an open shot by an average shooter is usually better than a covered shot from your star player. Force team to act on that truism
5) I would hope that once players have learned the basic playbook and you dont need to work them out more, that a lot of practice should be devoted to just these kinds of situations. Practice the half court offensive and defensive sets until players are tired of doing the sos and then practice them some more.
6) Tell your team that we should avoid such games whenever possible because the stats on such games are unpredictable
I’m sure that most coaches take all above into account but with Karl I often cant even see his rationale, agree or not
sgiustra - February 14, 2012
Wow, I like this prescription
Now if only we could get the Nuggets and Coach Karl to use it. In all seriousness, your prescription addresses a ton of problems the thinking fan sees—and not just with our dear Denver Nuggets, but with so many NBA franchises. Great work!
LongWindedHank - February 15, 2012
Durant missed three straight go-ahead shots in the last 20 seconds and lost by one.
I declare victory over this thread.
j/k
Rainbow skyline - February 15, 2012
Yeah, rainbow
I was thinking of this thread when I heard that happened.
Look KD is a terrific clutch player and had pretty good looks.
My suspicion is that fans are forced by endless media hilites to recall the hit shots and the fewer hilites of missed shots lead to a selective amnesia of missed shots.
P.S. There is much about this that plays into our hopes. We would rather see greatness by great men than see failure even though we sometimes like falls to. But greatness by greats is reassuring to us while failing is anxiety provoking if not depressing
sgiustra - February 16, 2012
I'd still take Durant over any player on the nuggets. Dude is killer.
But not over 1989’s MJ. If you want a closer he did it more than a few times.
although I’m not sure how well he could play in these long shorts.
WintermuteAI - February 21, 2012
me too, I love our Nugs but
Durant is a college A and our best player, Gallo, is a B, maybe B+.
My issue is not KD per se but the myth of the heroic closer vs the league avg vs us.
sgiustra - February 21, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Denver Stiffs to post a comment.