Luke Walton: Legendary "Appreciation" Thread

I'm curious. What were the teams involved, what were the matchups and who was on the floor with Luke in those 11 games?

you presenting that FACT in a Luke hate forum its obvious its there to support Luke importance....just like your thread bout having that great record with him in the starting lineup.

khmrP wrote:you presenting that FACT in a Luke hate forum its obvious its there to support Luke importance....just like your thread bout having that great record with him in the starting lineup.

So think about it for a moment, and come up with a reasonable explanation for it. Whining about it isn't going to change it no matter how much you want it to.

yea so while I think is it safe to assume we would've went 0-11 w/o luke playing in those gms?

sugi942 wrote:I'm curious. What were the teams involved, what were the matchups and who was on the floor with Luke in those 11 games?

@ CLE
@ BOS
@ NYK
@ MEM
@ LAC
vs GSW
vs BOS
@ NOR
vs NYK
vs SAC
vs PHO

PPG Differential in those games = 9.4

knm131 wrote:

sugi942 wrote:It's also possible that Luke is just taking up space which would account for why his +/- is good. He's on the floor with two all stars most of the time.

Well, it's also possible that he isn't.

Except he is....just taking up space. It's the biggest criticism of the plus-minus stat.

Luke had a plus-minus of +13 in yesterday's game, Lamar only had a +9. Guess Lamar sucks compared to Luke, right.

That's why there are other stats which measure a player's actual contribution to the margin while they're in there, like help value and productivity.

Comparison of help value:
Luke: 5
Lamar: 18

Comparison of productivity:
Luke: .4
Lamar: 1.21

cf. http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/boxscore.cgi?date=20090208&game=LALCLE

khmrP wrote:yea so while I think is it safe to assume we would've went 0-11 w/o luke playing in those gms?

I'm not quite sure you get it. Heh.

Another incorrect assumption, my goodness.

The Lakers are 18-1 when Andrew gets 10 rebounds or more. Are you going to conclude that the Lakers would be 1-18 in those games had Andrew not snatched 10 boards?

Yes or no.

then what am I to assume with your FACT? Its there to support your reasoning for not hating on Luke right? Well heres to Luke playing 20mpg+ lets go 32-0!!!!

kray28 wrote:

knm131 wrote:

sugi942 wrote:It's also possible that Luke is just taking up space which would account for why his +/- is good. He's on the floor with two all stars most of the time.

Well, it's also possible that he isn't.

Except he is....just taking up space. It's the biggest criticism of the plus-minus stat.

Luke had a plus-minus of +13 in yesterday's game, Lamar only had a +9. Guess Lamar sucks compared to Luke, right.

That's why there are other stats which measure a player's actual contribution to the margin while they're in there, like help value and productivity.

Comparison of help value:
Luke: 5
Lamar: 18

Comparison of productivity:
Luke: .4
Lamar: 1.21

cf. http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/boxscore.cgi?date=20090208&game=LALCLE

I never mentioned +/-. I'm not a huge fan of the +/- statistic.

But if you're going to use a comparison of "help value" as a basis for 'truth' -- then who, in your opinion, WITHOUT looking at the stats would you say would have the higher help value in the game versus New York? Kobe Bryant or Luke Walton?

Answer only one please.

This debate is so boring... No name calling or low blows at all...

khmrP wrote:then what am I to assume with your FACT? Its there to support your reasoning for not hating on Luke right? Well heres to Luke playing 20mpg+ lets go 32-0!!!!

I'm gonna pass. You don't get it. And I'm not a huge fan of running in circles.

Who cares if the fact is there to support Laker player Luke Walton or not. It's beside the point and doesn't change the fact.

If you'd like to EXPLAIN the fact, feel free. I'm interested in an explanation of the fact, not in some pathetic rant with multiple exclamation points.

can't explain that FACT so thats what I'm hoping for 32-0

khmrP wrote:can't explain that FACT so thats what I'm hoping for 32-0

Then like so many others, you're going to draw yet another (among many) incorrect conclusions. Best of luck to ya!

knm131 wrote:I never mentioned +/-. I'm not a huge fan of the +/- statistic.

LOL..You were tooting his +/- in the Gameday thread while the game was going on.

But if you're going to use a comparison of "help value" as a basis for 'truth' -- then who, in your opinion, WITHOUT looking at the stats would you say would have the higher help value in the game versus New York? Kobe Bryant or Luke Walton?

Answer only one please.

Luke...so what? All he can do is pass, right? Kobe was too busy dropping 61...that's reflected in this prod stat.

kray28 wrote:

knm131 wrote:I never mentioned +/-. I'm not a huge fan of the +/- statistic.

But if you're going to use a comparison of "help value" as a basis for 'truth' -- then who, in your opinion, WITHOUT looking at the stats would you say would have the higher help value in the game versus New York? Kobe Bryant or Luke Walton?

Answer only one please.

LOL..You were tooting his +/- in the Gameday thread while the game was going on.

Are you going to answer the question or not?

well its FACT, can't argue against FACTS so why can't I assume that if we play him 20mpg for the rest of the yr. we'll go undefeated?

knm131 wrote:

kray28 wrote:

knm131 wrote:I never mentioned +/-. I'm not a huge fan of the +/- statistic.

But if you're going to use a comparison of "help value" as a basis for 'truth' -- then who, in your opinion, WITHOUT looking at the stats would you say would have the higher help value in the game versus New York? Kobe Bryant or Luke Walton?

Answer only one please.

LOL..You were tooting his +/- in the Gameday thread while the game was going on.

Are you going to answer the question or not?

See Above.

knm131 wrote:

kray28 wrote:

knm131 wrote:I never mentioned +/-. I'm not a huge fan of the +/- statistic.

But if you're going to use a comparison of "help value" as a basis for 'truth' -- then who, in your opinion, WITHOUT looking at the stats would you say would have the higher help value in the game versus New York? Kobe Bryant or Luke Walton?

Answer only one please.

LOL..You were tooting his +/- in the Gameday thread while the game was going on.

Are you going to answer the question or not?

This is the same guy that said its a "myth" that radmanovic has horrible defense. You have to just leave the convo alone when someone says something like that

^ Well, it's also the same guy that said he had a gut feeling that Lamar wasn't going to play just to spite Phil.

Then Lamar came out and played a pretty good game.

Not everyone's gut can be trusted, apparently.

http://www.82games.com/0809/0809LAL.HTM

See Luke Walton.

LO7cK35 wrote:This is the same guy that said its a "myth" that radmanovic has horrible defense. You have to just leave the convo alone when someone says something like that

Compared to Luke...Vlad was freaking lockdown.

Quick...who scored the first basket of the second half last night at Cleveland....who was supposed to be guarding him and was late on the rotation?

*YAWN*

knm131 wrote:^ Well, it's also the same guy that said he had a gut feeling that Lamar wasn't going to play just to spite Phil.

Then Lamar came out and played a pretty good game.

Not everyone's gut can be trusted, apparently.

You're in a pretty weak argumentative position...so a change of subject is obviously convenient. This has nothing to do with gut..or speculation. It's numbers...numbers which show that Luke is basically doing little to nothing out there....other than not getting in the other four guys' way.

Why don't you provide with some statistical evidence that Luke isn't a waste of space?

borri wrote:http://www.82games.com/0809/0809LAL.HTM

See Luke Walton.

Would you say a player's Roland Rating is a pretty accurate gauge of a player's ability and impact to his team?

knm131 wrote:

borri wrote:http://www.82games.com/0809/0809LAL.HTM

See Luke Walton.

Would you say a player's Roland Rating is a pretty accurate gauge of a player's ability and impact to his team?

Since you're the only one with the ability to use your brain...maybe you should answer that?

Explain it to us.