37 replies to this topic

[NyMetsfan5]

I was just thinking about this. In an assist situation, if a player is fouled when going up for a lay up, dunk or shot, if they hit both free throws the player that fed them should be credited with an assist. I think thats a pretty interesting idea.

Thoughts?

[zDoctor]

I've also had this thought before and I like the idea. Only problem I see is that you would then have a scenario where there is an assist recorded without a field goal ever technically being made (or even attempted from an official scoring point of view).

The way it is now does seem like the passer gets screwed out of some credit though, you're right...

[Raiiny]

I also think someone taking a charge should be awarded with a steal or a block.. But that would just encourage more flopping lol.

[SenatorSpaceman]

People care too much about the record books to make this change to the scoring. All previous assist statistics would be obsolete as it would be impossible to quantify how many assists Cousy or Oscar Robertson or any old school player would have had if they'd been awarded assists for made free throws.

In theory, though, the idea is logical. Jeff Van Gundy has actually proposed this before. I just think too many people would object to the impact that it would have on the "sacred" history of NBA stat-tracking.

[Now_I_Know]

yea, all they'd have to do is change the definition from "a pass that leads to a basket" to "a pass that leads to 2 points"..but then u'd have to change basketball history, go back and re-write the hall of famer stats- perhaps magic averaged 20 assists for a season? all the work around that is not worth it, really.

[rwc1]

aside from it disrupting past nba stats, the number of assists a player gets per game is really arbitrary in itself so what's the point.  you don't win games by having more assists than the other team.  you can make the argument that number of assists can tell you how good of distributing a point guard is but what about the point guards who don't have knock down shooters thereby leading to misses?

[mihs]

rwc1, on 28 December 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

aside from it disrupting past nba stats, the number of assists a player gets per game is really arbitrary in itself so what's the point.  you don't win games by having more assists than the other team.  you can make the argument that number of assists can tell you how good of distributing a point guard is but what about the point guards who don't have knock down shooters thereby leading to misses?

By your logic you can argue any stat other than points is arbitrary, you don't win games by having more rebounds, steals, blocks, (less) turnovers, 3 pointers. The ideal assist is given when a player draws more than one defender (or a mismatch) and passes to the open man because he drew the defender. So a player with many assists (while not all the assists might be under this circumstance) shows the player's ability to create plays for their teammates.

[SenatorSpaceman]

rwc1, on 28 December 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

aside from it disrupting past nba stats, the number of assists a player gets per game is really arbitrary in itself

Arbitrary? How so. It's a direct result of a player's action. There's no discretion involved.

[nickalero99]

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 01:56 PM, said:

rwc1, on 28 December 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

aside from it disrupting past nba stats, the number of assists a player gets per game is really arbitrary in itself

Arbitrary? How so. It's a direct result of a player's action. There's no discretion involved.

Of course there is.  The amount of time/dribbles/moves can't be an objective standard for every scorer in the league.  There's discretion involved a lot of the time.  There are many situations where assists are subjective decisions.

That's not to say it's not a statistically valid category, just to say that some scorers are a bit more liberal with what qualifies than others.

[SenatorSpaceman]

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

[nickalero99]

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

You feel that each scorer objectively heeds that rule? I watch a lot of basketball while watching a box score of players involved, for obvious reasons, and frequently have difficulty predicting whether an assist will be credited on a given play.  Much like there is specific language as to what an error is in baseball, yet the language is applied subjectively.

[crazy47larry]

nickalero99, on 28 December 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

You feel that each scorer objectively heeds that rule? I watch a lot of basketball while watching a box score of players involved, for obvious reasons, and frequently have difficulty predicting whether an assist will be credited on a given play.  Much like there is specific language as to what an error is in baseball, yet the language is applied subjectively.

Oh man there is no such thing as objectivity in the NBA. Hell I doubt there is in any sport. I can think of so many assists Jason Kidd used to get even though the player he passed to would never score directly or the like. Baseball is a good example but I think it is like a good pitcher commanding the strike zone. You throw more strikes you get more called strikes. It is no coincidence guys like Rondo and CP3 get a lot of assists. The rule enforcers expect them to get a lot of assists and are inheretly biased towards those expectations. Kobe getting phantom calls follows the same script.

Edited by crazy47larry, 28 December 2012 - 03:02 PM.

[Now_I_Know]

crazy47larry, on 28 December 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

nickalero99, on 28 December 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

You feel that each scorer objectively heeds that rule? I watch a lot of basketball while watching a box score of players involved, for obvious reasons, and frequently have difficulty predicting whether an assist will be credited on a given play.  Much like there is specific language as to what an error is in baseball, yet the language is applied subjectively.

Oh man there is no such thing as objectivity in the NBA. Hell I doubt there is in any sport. I can think of so many assists Jason Kidd used to get even though the player he passed to would never score directly or the like. Baseball is a good example but I think it is like a good pitcher commanding the strike zone. You throw more strikes you get more called strikes. It is no coincidence guys like Rondo and CP3 get a lot of assists. The rule enforcers expect them to get a lot of assists and are inheretly biased towards those expectations. Kobe getting phantom calls follows the same script.

what about when kobe gets hammered in the head by three defenders with no call? is that subjective??

[bsong71]

It's an interesting idea, but the problem is that if you get fouled throwing up a half court shot, then whoever made the pass gets an assist.  Assists are quirky because if you make a perfect pass and someone blows the shot, you don't get the assist.

On the other hand, I do like the idea of giving a steal to a player who draws a charge.  That's just as good as a steal.  In fact, I'd say you should give 2 steal points for drawing a charge because you are putting your body in harm's way versus just intercepting a pass.

[crazy47larry]

Now_I_Know, on 28 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

crazy47larry, on 28 December 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

nickalero99, on 28 December 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

You feel that each scorer objectively heeds that rule? I watch a lot of basketball while watching a box score of players involved, for obvious reasons, and frequently have difficulty predicting whether an assist will be credited on a given play.  Much like there is specific language as to what an error is in baseball, yet the language is applied subjectively.

Oh man there is no such thing as objectivity in the NBA. Hell I doubt there is in any sport. I can think of so many assists Jason Kidd used to get even though the player he passed to would never score directly or the like. Baseball is a good example but I think it is like a good pitcher commanding the strike zone. You throw more strikes you get more called strikes. It is no coincidence guys like Rondo and CP3 get a lot of assists. The rule enforcers expect them to get a lot of assists and are inheretly biased towards those expectations. Kobe getting phantom calls follows the same script.

what about when kobe gets hammered in the head by three defenders with no call? is that subjective??

I would say missed or bad calls falls under practical error as opposed to straight up bias. The refs missing a foul is just a mistake, but the refs calling a bullcrap ticky tack foul is obviously subjective.

[Now_I_Know]

crazy47larry, on 28 December 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Now_I_Know, on 28 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

crazy47larry, on 28 December 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

nickalero99, on 28 December 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

You feel that each scorer objectively heeds that rule? I watch a lot of basketball while watching a box score of players involved, for obvious reasons, and frequently have difficulty predicting whether an assist will be credited on a given play.  Much like there is specific language as to what an error is in baseball, yet the language is applied subjectively.

Oh man there is no such thing as objectivity in the NBA. Hell I doubt there is in any sport. I can think of so many assists Jason Kidd used to get even though the player he passed to would never score directly or the like. Baseball is a good example but I think it is like a good pitcher commanding the strike zone. You throw more strikes you get more called strikes. It is no coincidence guys like Rondo and CP3 get a lot of assists. The rule enforcers expect them to get a lot of assists and are inheretly biased towards those expectations. Kobe getting phantom calls follows the same script.

what about when kobe gets hammered in the head by three defenders with no call? is that subjective??

I would say missed or bad calls falls under practical error as opposed to straight up bias. The refs missing a foul is just a mistake, but the refs calling a bullcrap ticky tack foul is obviously subjective.

u dont think there are refs out there who purposely penalize a player because of his rap for complaining to refs, especially if they don't sugarcoat their feelings? i've seen it with my own eyes. refs turn the other cheek all the time, and kobe is the biggest target for missed calls (especially in terms of superstars). i've never seen a player of kobe's stature get hammered as much as he does with no whistle. there are clearly some refs with personal bias in the game, and i don't even think it can be disputed.

[rwc1]

mihs, on 28 December 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

rwc1, on 28 December 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

aside from it disrupting past nba stats, the number of assists a player gets per game is really arbitrary in itself so what's the point.  you don't win games by having more assists than the other team.  you can make the argument that number of assists can tell you how good of distributing a point guard is but what about the point guards who don't have knock down shooters thereby leading to misses?

By your logic you can argue any stat other than points is arbitrary, you don't win games by having more rebounds, steals, blocks, (less) turnovers, 3 pointers. The ideal assist is given when a player draws more than one defender (or a mismatch) and passes to the open man because he drew the defender. So a player with many assists (while not all the assists might be under this circumstance) shows the player's ability to create plays for their teammates.

that's exactly what i'm saying.  except rebounds, steals, blocks, turnovers, 3 pointers are concrete stats.  assists on the other hand, even if you're a good playmaker, if your teammate sucks and misses wide open shots, does that mean your play making ability wasn't worth that assist?  i just think assists are so arbitrary as is what's the point of replacing one arbitrary guideline for another

[crazy47larry]

Now_I_Know, on 28 December 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

crazy47larry, on 28 December 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Now_I_Know, on 28 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

crazy47larry, on 28 December 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

nickalero99, on 28 December 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

SenatorSpaceman, on 28 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nickalero, you should read the official NBA definition of an assist. Factors such "the amount of time/dribbles/moves" do not come into play. The one factor that is most integral is the scorer making a move towards the basket upon receiving the ball. The rule book states that he can dribble around for the entire shock clock and the assist is still credited if his initial move is towards the hoop.

You feel that each scorer objectively heeds that rule? I watch a lot of basketball while watching a box score of players involved, for obvious reasons, and frequently have difficulty predicting whether an assist will be credited on a given play.  Much like there is specific language as to what an error is in baseball, yet the language is applied subjectively.

Oh man there is no such thing as objectivity in the NBA. Hell I doubt there is in any sport. I can think of so many assists Jason Kidd used to get even though the player he passed to would never score directly or the like. Baseball is a good example but I think it is like a good pitcher commanding the strike zone. You throw more strikes you get more called strikes. It is no coincidence guys like Rondo and CP3 get a lot of assists. The rule enforcers expect them to get a lot of assists and are inheretly biased towards those expectations. Kobe getting phantom calls follows the same script.

what about when kobe gets hammered in the head by three defenders with no call? is that subjective??

I would say missed or bad calls falls under practical error as opposed to straight up bias. The refs missing a foul is just a mistake, but the refs calling a bullcrap ticky tack foul is obviously subjective.

u dont think there are refs out there who purposely penalize a player because of his rap for complaining to refs, especially if they don't sugarcoat their feelings? i've seen it with my own eyes. refs turn the other cheek all the time, and kobe is the biggest target for missed calls (especially in terms of superstars). i've never seen a player of kobe's stature get hammered as much as he does with no whistle. there are clearly some refs with personal bias in the game, and i don't even think it can be disputed.

First of all we both agree that the game is biased, we are just on different ends of the spectrum. I believe that Kobe gets a lot of favorable calls but you seem to state otherwise. Either way we agree that the game is biased. I mean Joey Crawford makes some of the most obviously biased, horribly bad calls seemingly every night.

Edited by crazy47larry, 28 December 2012 - 03:25 PM.

[blangtang]

there might be more assists if they lowered the shot clock to 20 seconds

[crazy47larry]

blangtang, on 28 December 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

there might be more assists if they lowered the shot clock to 20 seconds

or if they lowered the net 20 inches.