Basketball assists, how important?

[KingGheedora]

I've never really thought much of assists. I think people make too big a deal out of them as a stat. It's good to have them because it shows that you give up the ball, but many people talk about them as if the person dishing the assists is 100% responsible for the resulting points. I think maybe some percentage of the time it is the case, but a lot the responsibility and credit for the execution still lies with the person making the basket.

Take the lakers for example, kwame brown f'ed up so many plays because of his butter fingers. Some other lakers could make great lobs but he'd mess it up pretty much no matter what. Pao and Bynum will catch anything and finish the play.

So in conclusion, people attribute too much credit to assists via PER ratings, and in sports columns when they say things like " Chris Paul/Nash had 10 points and 10 assists... accounted for 30 of the <team>'s points...".

Agree or disagree?

 

[Nitemare]

assist/turnover ratio matters more

 

[axelfox]

If assists wasn't important, then bball would just be all one on one.

*waits for people to say bball is ALL one on one*

 

[spidey07]

Disagree.

In all goal scoring games an assist matters. It's not that you are "giving it up" is so much as you are making a pass/assist to somebody that has a much higher chance of scoring with the ball/puck/whatever. This is the very basis of offense and defense in a goal scoring sport as the plays are drawn around this fact.

If you assist in scoring you are DIRECTLY involved in the play to score, the ultimate goal of the game in a goal scoring sport.

 

[KingGheedora]

Ok, but in the context of comparing one player to another, people use assists plus points to claim one player better than another who scores more points but has fewer assists. Example http://myespn.go.com/blogs/tru...53/Monday-Bullets.html

What do you think of assists when used in this way:
"I keep seeing this thrown about in various articles about the game. 'Chris Paul was contained, somewhat,' or 'Chris Paul had an average game.' What part of 17 points, 13 assists, four rebounds (two offensive), four steals and only two turnovers is average, or contained? Those numbers mean he was responsible for (ED. NOTE: more accurately "had a hand in") 44 points in the game or about 43% of the Hornets total scoring. Kobe 'MVP' Bryant has been worth 41% of his teams scoring in the playoffs, and he's been 'destroying' his opponents..."

I agree with spidey that it's a team sport and it matters that you are able to assist in scoring, but I am really talking about this in context of a statement like above. Would you say that Chris Paul is better than Kobe because he scores fewer points, but has more assists? Wouldn't you want to at least count the assists as one point each, rather than the full two points, because the person dishing is still not 100% responsible for the points resulting from the assists?

 

[Deeko]

Assists are very important. Some of the best players in the league specialize in assists and don't score a lot (such as Jason Kidd). Having a superstar at PG that can distribute the ball effectively makes your entire team better.

In football, that position is regarded as the most impotant on the team. In other sports, the similar position is often overlooked as less important. It shouldn't be.

 

[vi edit]

Assists are just a stat. Just like rebounds, blocks and points. They mean nothing if you don't win.

Some assists are pushed too hard for the sake of an assist. Other times a pass should have been made instead of forcing a shot. A good player knows when to choose the right option.

 

[James3shin]

I disagree. Ever play organized ball? How about against a good point that can "run" the game? The assist stat gives me an idea of how good a point is at managing his team and their pace. CP3, JKidd, Nash and to a [very] slightly less degree, Deron Williams, are the premier PGs in the NBA and when I go through their stats, I look at their assists, then assists to TO, then points, and finally steals. I guess you can say it is the main stat for PGs.

 

[Miramonti]

If you have the ball in your hands a lot, you're probably going to get a couple assists during the game, but to get a lot is significant. It means you're getting the ball to players where and when they are comfortable making the shot. There is a basketball genius in doing it well (as well as in hockey etc.)

If your team as a whole is getting a lot of assists, it means your team is passing the ball well and usually moving it from side to side to get more open shots. Those are generalizations, but assists are a huge component in the game, and can say a lot about how your team is playing.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: KingGheedora
Ok, but in the context of comparing one player to another, people use assists plus points to claim one player better than another who scores more points but has fewer assists. Example http://myespn.go.com/blogs/tru...53/Monday-Bullets.html

What do you think of assists when used in this way:
"I keep seeing this thrown about in various articles about the game. 'Chris Paul was contained, somewhat,' or 'Chris Paul had an average game.' What part of 17 points, 13 assists, four rebounds (two offensive), four steals and only two turnovers is average, or contained? Those numbers mean he was responsible for (ED. NOTE: more accurately "had a hand in") 44 points in the game or about 43% of the Hornets total scoring. Kobe 'MVP' Bryant has been worth 41% of his teams scoring in the playoffs, and he's been 'destroying' his opponents..."

I agree with spidey that it's a team sport and it matters that you are able to assist in scoring, but I am really talking about this in context of a statement like above. Would you say that Chris Paul is better than Kobe because he scores fewer points, but has more assists? Wouldn't you want to at least count the assists as one point each, rather than the full two points, because the person dishing is still not 100% responsible for the points resulting from the assists?

I don't think you can boil it down to such a stats measure. The assist is DIRECTLY tied to the goal/score. My point is it isn't even a basketball thing, it's any goal sport. It's a team sport and in many ways the assist IS the reason for the score. I guess if you've ever played competitive goal sports you'd understand.

No, count the assist for the point because the assist is what made the point possible. It's a team sport and in general you can have the greatest player out there but without their teammates they will not score as much.

 

[slayer202]

put it this way, if you didn't pass to the guy that scored, he might not have scored. especially on cuts to the basket and stuff like that, you deserve credit for making those passes

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: KingGheedora
Take the lakers for example, kwame brown f'ed up so many plays because of his butter fingers. Some other lakers could make great lobs but he'd mess it up pretty much no matter what. Pao and Bynum will catch anything and finish the play.

Foundational question: Do you think that wide receivers are more important than quarterbacks?

MotionMan