• Since we moved our URL please clear your browsers history and cookies and try logging in again. Thank you and sorry for any inconvenience
  • Since we moved our URL please clear your browsers history and cookies and try logging in again. Thank you and sorry for any inconvenience

Lithuanian national team - 2012

  • Thread starter Thread starter auris12
  • Start date Start date
Kaukenas refused to camp 2005 and 2006 at age of 28-29...its not 22...And kaukenas case was different he was better than slanina in 2003-2004 years.Motiejunas at age of 21 in 2011 i doint think he was better than K.Lavrinovic,Songaila,Javtokas,Valanciunas,Jankunas that was taken instead.
National team its not kindargarden kids,if you can take critical coach opinion and broke down,so you are not ready fo men game.But Jonas was ok as match with russia shown.Such coaches like kurtinaitis and pacesas will demand even more than kemzura,there is now time in 5 weeks to teach young players,or you make right plays or you will sit on the bench.This is why im saying they firstly need learn from more experience players,when you put 20-21 year old kid on the floor in mens champs,you will have to do more teaching to do,than coaching.Valanciunas is on good track he played for 2 summers,in 3 championchips and he already got very usefull experience,he saw what its like to play in 1/4 games,when presure is alot bigger and so on.He learn from javtokas about defence alot,he learn from songaila about positioning your body inside.Jonas need get more muscles to defend big bodies and this will come with time.This is how young players should go through national team.Start from bench,learn from more experience players,see on what you need to work and come back next summer more prapared for championships.Jonas is on good track,Motiejunas is on ilgaukas track...

AND WHAT MOTIEJUNAS REFUSE to play for lietuva HAVE TO DO WITH KEMZURAS COACHING STYLE? and for you its ok when kids begin to demand for something in national team?i dont see what to talk here.Kemzuras coaching wasnt good this summer,but this is not excuse NOT TO HELp LITHUANIAN NATIONal TEAM when you were asked to do so !

Motiejunas was better than Lavrinovic and Songaila that year. He got higher numbers than Lavrinovic and Songaila, he had higher efficiency. His d was poor but lavrinovic sucks at defense too. In my opinion the situation here is similar to Kaukanas Slanina situation back then. Motiejunas in friendly games outplayed Lavrinovic yet Lavrinovic was still selected because he is older and Kemzura hoped that he will pley in just like Delininkaitis who looked so awful in preparation games that gecevicius even during those 8 minutes managed to outplay him.

Thats what pisses off. You feel that you were better than certain players, you look at the stat sheets and they too clearly show that you were better, but coach still select other players. Then what the fuck is the use of those preparation games? Why invite all those 19 players if coach already has in mind what 12 will come and performance on the preparation games will have 0 influence on the decision.

Its not great when 20 year old starts giving the requirements but it is not nice when a coach just tells "Fuck those preparation games performances, I will select what I like more anyway." either.

yeah Kurtinaitis requires more from players than Kemzura but he and Pacesas at least knows how to treat young players. You need to demand good game but you also need to show some confidence in them. Benching young players after every single mistake is a very, very stupid thing to do because then you will get same result as Valanciunas vs Tiunisia. Valanciunas was even afraid to hold the ball, not even talking about shooting. He was mentally broken.

How come he played better against Russia? Because Kemzura had no choice. Jonas had a good first quarter but ofcourse was benched regardless and then when he came in the middle of the third he was back to his Tunisia mode - allowed to easy facial dunks for Mazgove and looked broken again. kemzura if he could have done what he usually did this tournament - that is bench Valanciunas and let him rot there in his misery add a few screams in his face about his uselessness in his face for better riddance. The thing is - he could not, Songaila was just substituted and he needed rest and Kavaliauskas was not ready for the game (for some reason he was very slow in this game, maybe some minor but very nagging injury or something). So he was forced to keep Jonas in play and oh the wonder, Valanciunas slowly got his confidence back, had a couple of good plays on D good rebounds, kalnietis hit a couple of 3 and Jonas himself started scoring - the result was our best run in the game until Jonas injury and Kalnietis substitution.

Thats a thing how you need to deal with young players, no it is not a farm of raising young players but at the same time you need to let them feel that the effort is what matters give or take a couple of mistakes. If couch starts benching a player after every single mistake it is the shortest road to breaking a player mentally specially someone as young as 20 year old. Pacesas and Kurtinaitis know that. Kemzura probably knew that too but forgot in his hysterical mood as he felt like his ass is burning after screwing up an Euro and team not showing a good game during preparation during qualification and even in the main event. It was a road to self destruction.

Because Jonas was his best rebounding guy, with all how well Songaila played he could not control the boards and without controlling the boards you cannot launch quick attacks effectively, and without quick attacks you are forces to play positional play and lithuania sucks at positional play. Ironic that despite us having a bunch of veterans all of them feel better at faster play and cannot play in a slow game.
 
Motiejunas was better than Lavrinovic and Songaila that year. He got higher numbers than Lavrinovic and Songaila, he had higher efficiency. His d was poor but lavrinovic sucks at defense too. In my opinion the situation here is similar to Kaukanas Slanina situation back then. Motiejunas in friendly games outplayed Lavrinovic yet Lavrinovic was still selected because he is older and Kemzura hoped that he will pley in just like Delininkaitis who looked so awful in preparation games that gecevicius even during those 8 minutes managed to outplay him.

Thats what pisses off. You feel that you were better than certain players, you look at the stat sheets and they too clearly show that you were better, but coach still select other players. Then what the fuck is the use of those preparation games? Why invite all those 19 players if coach already has in mind what 12 will come and performance on the preparation games will have 0 influence on the decision.

Its not great when 20 year old starts giving the requirements but it is not nice when a coach just tells "Fuck those preparation games performances, I will select what I like more anyway." either.

yeah Kurtinaitis requires more from players than Kemzura but he and Pacesas at least knows how to treat young players. You need to demand good game but you also need to show some confidence in them. Benching young players after every single mistake is a very, very stupid thing to do because then you will get same result as Valanciunas vs Tiunisia. Valanciunas was even afraid to hold the ball, not even talking about shooting. He was mentally broken.

How come he played better against Russia? Because Kemzura had no choice. Jonas had a good first quarter but ofcourse was benched regardless and then when he came in the middle of the third he was back to his Tunisia mode - allowed to easy facial dunks for Mazgove and looked broken again. kemzura if he could have done what he usually did this tournament - that is bench Valanciunas and let him rot there in his misery add a few screams in his face about his uselessness in his face for better riddance. The thing is - he could not, Songaila was just substituted and he needed rest and Kavaliauskas was not ready for the game (for some reason he was very slow in this game, maybe some minor but very nagging injury or something). So he was forced to keep Jonas in play and oh the wonder, Valanciunas slowly got his confidence back, had a couple of good plays on D good rebounds, kalnietis hit a couple of 3 and Jonas himself started scoring - the result was our best run in the game until Jonas injury and Kalnietis substitution.

Thats a thing how you need to deal with young players, no it is not a farm of raising young players but at the same time you need to let them feel that the effort is what matters give or take a couple of mistakes. If couch starts benching a player after every single mistake it is the shortest road to breaking a player mentally specially someone as young as 20 year old. Pacesas and Kurtinaitis know that. Kemzura probably knew that too but forgot in his hysterical mood as he felt like his ass is burning after screwing up an Euro and team not showing a good game during preparation during qualification and even in the main event. It was a road to self destruction.

Because Jonas was his best rebounding guy, with all how well Songaila played he could not control the boards and without controlling the boards you cannot launch quick attacks effectively, and without quick attacks you are forces to play positional play and lithuania sucks at positional play. Ironic that despite us having a bunch of veterans all of them feel better at faster play and cannot play in a slow game.


I dont have time to go through analize game.But some of your points arent right.Lithuanian defended best when sonagila and jankunas was ont he floor.Defence with Valanciunas and kleiza was worse.Rebuoding maybe was worse,but defence overall still was better with darius and paulius.And the game against russia,i dont thinkJonas played well in 1 querter ,kaunas was dunking in the 1 querter...Jonas played well in second half,not the first one.
Have you seen songailas stats in eurobasket2011 or you remeber only that mistake against macedonia? Songaila played well in 2011.No way motiejunas in 2011 was better,he isnt better even know in 2012 and in 2011 wasnt either...You dont understand the point,if you have better stats in 2 friendly games it doesnt mean you will get the place on final roster.Coaches always sees training when those players play agains each other.Friendly games is one of the arguments yes,BUT NOT THE FINAL ONE THAT DECIDE! its just crazy to say if he had good game in friendly that player suddenly becomes better than player that have proven their level for many years...You know well why coaches invite 20 players,and those younger knows that most likely they want make final roster,but coaches are trying to show them what it s like to be in the team and so on ,because later they gonna be on the team...and MOTIEJUNAS IS THE FIRST ONE YOUNG PLAYER WHO GOT UPSET AFTER cut...Even this season Lavrinovic played well in euroleague .I know you gonna say stats show diferently,but how can you compare motiejunas palying 35min in weakest euroleague team and stats of player who plays with elite euroleague team in 18-20 minutes? I just cant see how can you say 100% that at age of 21 motiejunas was better that proven euroleague players like lavrinovic and songaila.ITs just not true ,we can agree maybe they were in same level at most.I COULD try to UNDERSTAND if Motiejunas would be better by 2 heads than the rest players in that position,but this wasnt the case.Players were very similair level and coaches decided to take players with more experience i dont see anything wrong here to be upset.Its show how arrogant and good thinking about yourself he is,if he thinks that in 2011 he was already better than proven players like lavrinovic or songaila.Its is not right for 21 year old doesnt matter how you look at it.Its juts not right to act like that for youngster...

BUT IM REAPETING ALL THOSE KEMZURAs coaching failures IS NOT EXCUSE TO DO NOT HELP NATIONAL TEAM...You are young guy so sit ont he bench and learn and try to help as much as you can.What he did this summer,im sincerely saying im not sure i want to see such ego in national team lockeroom...UNTIL he WONT grow up and dont do such silly demands as minutes in national team...so there will be games when he gonna hurt the team and still coaches will have to leave him on the floor because its was agreed? BULLSHIt! until motiejunas wont fix his head,i dont think he can help Lithuanian national team.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dont have time to go through analize game.But some of your points arent right.Lithuanian defended best when sonagila and jankunas was ont he floor.Defence with Valanciunas and kleiza was worse.Rebuoding maybe was worse,but defence overall still was better with darius and paulius.And the game against russia,i dont thinkJonas played well in 1 querter ,kaunas was dunking in the 1 querter...Jonas played well in second half,not the first one.
Have you seen songailas stats in eurobasket2011 or you remeber only that mistake against macedonia? Songaila played well in 2011.No way motiejunas in 2011 was better,he isnt better even know in 2012 and in 2011 wasnt either...You dont understand the point,if you have better stats in 2 friendly games it doesnt mean you will get the place on final roster.Coaches always sees training when those players play agains each other.Friendly games is one of the arguments yes,BUT NOT THE FINAL ONE THAT DECIDE! its just crazy to say if he had good game in friendly that player suddenly becomes better than player that have proven their level for many years...You know well why coaches invite 20 players,and those younger knows that most likely they want make final roster,but coaches are trying to show them what it s like to be in the team and so on ,because later they gonna be on the team...and MOTIEJUNAS IS THE FIRST ONE YOUNG PLAYER WHO GOT UPSET AFTER cut...Even this season Lavrinovic played well in euroleague .I know you gonna say stats show diferently,but how can you compare motiejunas palying 35min in weakest euroleague team and stats of player who plays with elite euroleague team in 18-20 minutes? I just cant see how can you say 100% that at age of 21 motiejunas was better that proven euroleague players like lavrinovic and songaila.ITs just not true ,we can agree maybe they were in same level at most.I COULD try to UNDERSTAND if Motiejunas would be better by 2 heads than the rest players in that position,but this wasnt the case.Players were very similair level and coaches decided to take players with more experience i dont see anything wrong here to be upset.Its show how arrogant and good thinking about yourself he is,if he thinks that in 2011 he was already better than proven players like lavrinovic or songaila.Its is not right for 21 year old doesnt matter how you look at it.Its juts not right to act like that for youngster...

BUT IM REAPETING ALL THOSE KEMZURAs coaching failures IS NOT EXCUSE TO DO NOT HELP NATIONAL TEAM...You are young guy so sit ont he bench and learn and try to help as much as you can.What he did this summer,im sincerely saying im not sure i want to see such ego in national team lockeroom...UNTIL he WONT grow up and dont do such silly demands as minutes in national team...so there will be games when he gonna hurt the team and still coaches will have to leave him on the floor because its was agreed? BULLSHIt! until motiejunas wont fix his head,i dont think he can help Lithuanian national team.

Kaunas dunked because Jonas went to block out Punkrashov and he went to block out Ponkrashov because Kalnietis let him drive to the basket then Pnkrashov made a pass and we had a dunk. You cannot be seriously putting that on Jonas because it was on Kalnietis crappy d to allow Ponkrashov such an easy drive.

We also had 4 more points scored by Jonas man but they all went to crappy guards performance who just cannot contain the 3pt line.

There is a reason why after Songaila entered the big man points stopped and guards scored points increased. Thats because Songaila stays with his man and doesnt go helping our guards after their screw ups. When Songaila entered we had an increase of lay-ups and open driving lines because Songaila just doesnt go up to contests them and its probably for the best as his hands are short and he would not be of any use there anyway.

But it was working with Jonas better. Let me remind you that with Jonas in the first quarter we were still leading by one point and since he left - we were loosing by 8. Call me stupid but I think it is better +1 than -8 and the main guy to blame was Jonas as not always guards found Jonas open man on their drive a few times they were forced to throw back stupid passes or ill adviced high-arch shots. And when they did - Jonas was grabbing rebounds.

For me that is a good enough play making sure we stay in the lead.

With Songaila bigs stopped scoring for us and while part of it was his great man on man defense another part was his non-existing help defense, and guards or Kirilenko simply had no need to search for big guys under as they had all their freedom to finish freely under the rim.

Motiejunas was better. Kemzura said that he want the best guys now.And he lied. Because Motiejunas was performing better now. Sure Lavrinovic had a bigger career but you need to look at their production now. And it wasnt better than Motiejunas. In fact it was worse. Not by a big margin but worse still.

Look Kemzura took the crappy Delininkaitis in who was completely out of form with same hope that he revive his old form. He never did. He just sat there stinking up the bench and whenever he stepped on the court he looked like a shadow of himself.

Taking player for his past results is stupid. You need to take your best players now, not your best players yesterday.

Songaila came in with his place guaranteed. He let it slip in one of his interviews as he said he was hoping to fish for better contract by his play in NT this summer though at that point he should have been talking about the supposed competition for his spot on the team. But he had the free ticket. Why it is so bad from Motiejunas who was Euroleagues leading rebounder and a leader of his team to ask for the same treatment? Just because he is young? Sabonis was young too at some point. It doesnt mean he should have been benched because of that (though his personality was just as hard as Motiejunas to handle). You need to take talent and run. If for that you need to give him same guarantees you are giving to veterans - so be it, specially when his game is either equal or better than their game.
 
Motiejunas improved so much since the 2010-11 season. Sure, Ksystof was a better player than Motiejunas in 2011, but it couldn't be said so in 2012. Right now, Motiejunas is the most skilled Lithuanian PF. No question about it. He dominated against potential future NBA players this summer, and that says something about him.
 
Someone must have given you the wrong sheet then.

I was looking at this one:

http://london2012.fiba.com/pages/eng/fe/12/olym/team/p/sid/6232/tid/2135/profile.html

It wasn't wrong. It was incomplete. It didn't have the efficiency rating stat so I had to make do the best I could. Kaukėnas was the third leading scorer while being only number eight in terms of minutes played. Moreover, only two of the eight leading scorers had higher field goal percentages than Kaukėnas. He was a perfect eight for eight shooting fouls. Finally, his ratio of steals plus blocked shots to turnovers was better than average.

Why you do not call Valanciunas one of the leaders? He had higher efficiency than the super leader Kaukenas.

Kaukenas had a miserable 3.8 efficiency and you call a player like that one of the leaders on the tournament?

I'm actually surprised his efficiency rating was that low compared with the other players. How is it calculated? Does it take into consideration team points scored and team points allowed when a player is on the floor?

Come on, I would understand if he(Kaukėnas) would have done massive job on defense but he did not - Pocius or even Seibutis were better defenders than him.

I would have liked to see a stat such as opposition points allowed per minute when he played versus when he was on the bench in order to assess his defence.

But I'm not married to Kaukėnas any more so than I am to any other player. If I overrated him on the basis of incomplete information, well so be it. I overrated him then. Why are you behaving like I attacked some favourite of yours?

:confused:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
in other words, Kemzura was unable to reassure one of the best young talents we have that he is gonna get any minutes over latvian league star Kavaliauskas....

You know very well that the choice wasn't between Kavaliauskas and Motiejūnas at the time. It was between Javtokas and Motiejūnas. if Javtokas could play, then Motiejūnas would not make the team. That was the issue.

...and you are still defending him and saying he did a good job? Really now.

No, I never said that Kemzūra did a good job. The minimum standard by which a Team Lietuva coach is judged is taking the team to the semis during an Olympic year. He didn't; so he failed. That doesn't mean that I fault Kemzūra though for the way he handled Motiejūnas. Motiejūnas had chosen not to come to camp unless he was guaranteed a meaningful role. None of the Lithuanian coaches to date would have provided such a guaranty.
 
I was looking at this one:

http://london2012.fiba.com/pages/eng/fe/12/olym/team/p/sid/6232/tid/2135/profile.html

It wasn't wrong. It was incomplete. It didn't have the efficiency rating stat so I had to make do the best I could. Kaukėnas was the third leading scorer while being only number eight in terms of minutes played. Moreover, only two of the eight leading scorers had higher field goal percentages than Kaukėnas. He was a perfect eight for eight shooting fouls. Finally, his ratio of steals plus blocked shots to turnovers was better than average.



I'm actually surprised his efficiency rating was that low compared with the other players. How is it calculated? Does it take into consideration team points scored and team points allowed when a player is on the floor?



I would have liked to see a stat such as opposition points allowed per minute when he played versus when he was on the bench in order to assess his defence.

But I'm not married to Kaukėnas any more so than I am to any other player. If I overrated him on the basis of incomplete information, well so be it. I overrated him then. Why are you behaving like I attacked some favourite of yours?

:confused:

The efficiency takes into account minutes played and the useful and not useful things done. Not doing anything else but scoring will give you lower efficiency.

It also takjes into account shooting percentage, but generaly more scoring even at a lower percentage gives you decent efficiency. For a third-second best scorer on the team to be second worst oiin efficiency speaks that stats wise Kaukenas failed in many aspects of the game other than scoring.

He did not rebound. Its not bad for a SG to not rebound? Wrong, our team had to play small lots of times, in such cases SG has to go for a rebound like a center. I cant complain about Seibutis or Pocius but Kaukenas - he did not seem to bother with stuff like rebounding or even boxing out so that at least opponent SG doesnt get in and grab an easy rebound. It woulkd be understandable if Kaukenas was running for fast break, but with small lineup running on fast breaks is stupid as chance to control the boards is minimal and even on the rebounds one would collect one will have to battle meaning wasting precious seconds.

Kaukanas didnt do many assists (not a must for a SG though) but did plenty of TO. He did fouls (fouling is very punishing, but can be saved by fouls commited against you, sadly Kaukenas wasnt that active in that regard too).

All and all it all come sto the second worst efficiency rating on the team and that just isnt a leader thing by a stretch.

And no points allowed (the so called +/- rating) doesnt go into account. Efficiency is the best when deciding players contribution on offense foremost. It does cover some defense but not all. +/- in that regard tells more about D but one has to always take into account the teammates you are playing and opponents you playu against. For example having high + rating can look way much less impressive if it turns out you collected it playing against the third unit.

And I am not bahving like you attacked some favourite of mine. I just find it really unfair when you call a guy who was one of the worst efficient guy on the team a leader. You should call Kleiza, Jankunas, Valanciunas, Kavaliauskas, Songaila, Kalnietis, Saras, Jasaitis, Pocius leaders before Kaukenas. They deserve it more than a guy whose main contribution was scoring, specially when he wasnt even efficient in that.
 
I just find it really unfair when you call a guy who was one of the worst efficient guy on the team a leader.

Well I didn't necessarily think he was a team leader. Judging from the stat sheet I had, I just thought he was one of the two best players. The efficiency rating he recorded proves me wrong, however, although I'm really surprised that it turned out to be that low given that it doesn't incorporate +/- stats.

:confused:
 
Well I didn't necessarily think he was a team leader. Judging from the stat sheet I had, I just thought he was one of the two best players. The efficiency rating he recorded proves me wrong, however, although I'm really surprised that it turned out to be that low given that it doesn't incorporate +/- stats.

:confused:

your fixation on Kaukenas is understandable - players who mainly only score always look easy on the eye and appeal to casual fans (case in point such ballhogs like Bryant and etc:o). The thing with such players is that their net value is often equal to zero if not minus in some occasions, because a) most of them don't bother playing defense; b) even if they try to play defense, they can't match big guys impact in this area anyway (due to physical and positional differences).
 
Yeah, PPG is not that meaningful in basketball - I'd rather have an SG that had, for example: 6.2 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 2.3 APG than a player that had 11.8 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 1.2 APG. Such an SG is more efficient on court.

Also, efficiency is calculated like this: (points scored + rebounds grabbed + assists made + steals made + blocks made + fouls drawn) - (missed free throws + missed two pointers + missed three pointers + turnovers + fouls + blocked shots against you). At least, that is the case for Euroleague. Minutes are not even considered. So as long as the shooter is perfect and commits no turnovers or fouls, he'll have a pretty decent efficiency rating.
 
Yeah, PPG is not that meaningful in basketball - I'd rather have an SG that had, for example: 6.2 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 2.3 APG than a player that had 11.8 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 1.2 APG. Such an SG is more efficient on court.

Also, efficiency is calculated like this: (points scored + rebounds grabbed + assists made + steals made + blocks made + fouls drawn) - (missed free throws + missed two pointers + missed three pointers + turnovers + fouls + blocked shots against you). At least, that is the case for Euroleague. Minutes are not even considered. So as long as the shooter is perfect and commits no turnovers or fouls, he'll have a pretty decent efficiency rating.

Actually minutes are taken into account. A player who plays 1 minute and has 0 in all stats has efficiency of 0 as well but a guy who plays 4 minutes and has 0 in all statistic categories has -1 efficiency. I think in the last game against Russia Kavaliauskas had -1 efficiency despite having 0 in all statistical graphs.

Well anyway, I do agree with you that more valuable player is the one who scores twice less points but does many other things. Those scoring only guys are easy to fall in love but if all they do is score and they do not have high % in that then they are not nearly as useful for a team as they might seem to. I certainly would not call such guys leaders if they do not do anything else or at least are not great at scoring (and to be great at scoring means having real high % in TS (true shooting) category).

Thats why the team wont miss Kaukenas much at all. Sure he had two good games but the other 8 were pretty horrible and he sank his team down more than he pulled it up.
 
your fixation on Kaukenas is understandable - players who mainly only score always look easy on the eye and appeal to casual fans (case in point such ballhogs like Bryant and etc:o). The thing with such players is that their net value is often equal to zero if not minus in some occasions, because a) most of them don't bother playing defense; b) even if they try to play defense, they can't match big guys impact in this area anyway (due to physical and positional differences).

Well it's not fair to say that I'm fixated on Kaukėnas but otherwise I agree with you. I like to see efficiency rating and +/- stats for players. Without those stats we only have part of the picture.

Also, efficiency is calculated like this: (points scored + rebounds grabbed + assists made + steals made + blocks made + fouls drawn) - (missed free throws + missed two pointers + missed three pointers + turnovers + fouls + blocked shots against you). At least, that is the case for Euroleague. Minutes are not even considered. So as long as the shooter is perfect and commits no turnovers or fouls, he'll have a pretty decent efficiency rating.

Interesting! For many years I've been calculating my own efficiency ratings from boxscores as follows:

(points scored + rebounds grabbed + assists made + 2 X steals made + 2 X blocks made) - (turnovers + fouls + missed field goals).

The reason I've been giving twice the weight to blocked shots and steals is because they're uncommon compared with turnovers. Moreover blocked shots and steals are also big psychologically and steals are particularly valuable compared with other turnovers because they can lead to quick fast break points as the team giving up the ball can be completely out of position defensively.

:cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well it's not fair to say that I'm fixated on Kaukėnas but otherwise I agree with you. I like to see efficiency rating and +/- stats for players. Without those stats we only have part of the picture.

Thats my biggest gripe against FIBA sites is that they never provide efficiency or at least +/-. Personally I prefer efficiency more than +/- but +/- can be pretty helpful too even though I consider it less reliable than efficiency.

Still FIBA ignores that and doenst provide us with efficiency not talking about such stats as TS % points per possesions and others that NBA stats provide. FIBA still has a long, loooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go. Whenever I came to ther official sites I feel like thrown back into the stone age really as they provide so little actual stats. They give points rebounds assists etc. but they could at least count efficiency or +/-. I am not asking for advanced stats like TS% or usage % but at least those two basic ones or at very least one of them.
 
Thats my biggest gripe against FIBA sites is that they never provide efficiency or at least +/-. Personally I prefer efficiency more than +/- but +/- can be pretty helpful too even though I consider it less reliable than efficiency.

FIBA still has a long, loooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go
I still prefer this way)
Maybe i am old fashioned ,but for me stats really doesn't tell that much if you watch the game live
You get enough info nowadays on tv screen as it is.
I agree with Hepcat to the point that if he had thought that kaukenas was one of the best in the team he wasn't wrong at all.
You can not tell by looking at the sheet of paper and say ,like - this player played important minutes,and this player had garbage time.
This player was defending opponent's leader whole time,and this one was his substitute.
You have to consider this too.

So maybe Kleiza had best numbers of all,so what?

Anyway,out of topic,there is this film i watched recently with B Pitt as a baseball coach - Moneyball
explains a lot
 
I still prefer this way)
Maybe i am old fashioned ,but for me stats really doesn't tell that much if you watch the game live
You get enough info nowadays on tv screen as it is.
I agree with Hepcat to the point that if he had thought that kaukenas was one of the best in the team he wasn't wrong at all.
You can not tell by looking at the sheet of paper and say ,like - this player played important minutes,and this player had garbage time.
This player was defending opponent's leader whole time,and this one was his substitute.
You have to consider this too.

So maybe Kleiza had best numbers of all,so what?

Anyway,out of topic,there is this film i watched recently with B Pitt as a baseball coach - Moneyball
explains a lot

Kaukenas did poor job at defending, thats what thoses stats show too. Kaukenas was moving very poorly on defensive end, he was always too slow to stop the drives as a result he was either outrunned or he was forced to foul. You can see in his foul category that he was fouling a lot as a result.

When a big guy fouls it doesnt tell if it was his mistake or someone elses as big mans (other than Songaila) usually do help D.

With guards the to foul stats much more directly point at their defensive mistakes or at very least lack of speed on their feet.

Kaukenas was a worst shooting guard defender on the team. Whenever I watch Seibutis and Pocius move on defense the result is different. Seibutis do foul a lot too but most of his fouls come from reaching-ins when he tries too eagerly steal the ball, Kaukenas majority fouls come when he falls for oponents first step. Kaukenas only had one good defensive game and that was against Tunisia in all others he moved poorly defensively. He and Saras were our main contributors to our very poor 3pt line defense (which includes both - covering distance shots and preventing the drives).

You are saying that Kaukenas did not play garbage time? But who did play a garbage time? Seibutis also played plenty against leaders as did Pocius, and Seibutis managed to get same fficiency despite having less minutes per game and less shooting. Pocius had higher stats.

I would say that stats are a good way telling of what you miss in the game. As I said - easiest thing to see during games is scoring. Thats why Kaukenas looked so good, but you also have to consider other things that are hard to notice and you do need stats to see those as unless you are following only one person all the time they are pretty much impossible to notice.

Efficiency simply summarizes the stats under your nose.

Stats do not tell everything but they do tell 80% of the story. Kaukenas was a guy who was dragging our team down in a lot of occasions. Yeah he did pulls in the last two games, but he sucked donkeys ass during the rest. I miss him on a team as a person, he gave a lot of his summers for LT and other than his conflicts with Sireika never refused to come, but I certainly wont miss his game this summer. That guy wasnt a leader and his poor efficiency is a good indicator at that.

If your theory about stats being quite irrelevant would be right than coaches and scouts would not be using stats-sheets. They would just rewind the tape a couple of times. And those guys are basketball pros but even for them is hard to see every single bit that happens on the court (unless you only watch one player all the time). Stats are very helpful and tells a lot more than a naked eye can notice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
to Darknemo2000
I agree to disagree with you here,mate.

Stats do not tell everything but they do tell 80% of the story
Not so sure about 80 percent,and i can not give you exact number too - bit lower ,maybe?
Stats for me is a bit of complimentary form of to the game.
They don't tell you full story -
lets say you have 1-7 from 3 points.
A - player got first shot and missed last 6
B- player missed first 6 shots and got last ,important one.
Or another example like kalnietis,who had one really shit game and had 9 assist.
 
Back
Top