A note about inauguration costs. I guess donations aren’t covering everything…

From the Washington Post

Not that it should have anything to do with the price of tea in china…but I voted for Bush.

Voted for him last time too.

Who I or anyone voted for, should have nothing to do with a discussion about any issue. The reason I even write it is because of all the people who just assumed they knew who I voted for and that the point of the post was to bash the President. It’s not. It was discussion. Good old fashioned All American discussion about issues affecting our country.

I wasn’t suprised that in the discussions that ensued that people disagreed. That’s great. It makes us all smarter to have a discussion. I was caught a little off guard at how hateful some of the responses were.

The Issues

The underlying issueof the post wasn’t the Inauguration celebrations. The issues were runaway spending and lack of personal savings.

As a country, our politicians are spending taxpayer money, OUR money as if there is no limit to how big a deficit they can run. I happen to be someone who believes that it’s a problem.

In this country, as individuals, we are not saving money. There are some who believe that our individual savings rate could be negative going forward. (Meaning most people are spending more than they have and ending the year in more debt rather than with more savings)

That scares me.

These twoproblems are issues thatPresident Bushcanmitigate or even solve.

I voted for W because I felt he would be a stronger leader than Kerry could be. I’m not a supporter of everything he does, but that’s OK. There is no such thing as a perfect candidate for any office. In this country, for the office of the President, we don’t elect the best candidate. We elect the best of the candidates the parties offer us. I felt and still feel that W was the best of the candidates. One of his best qualities is his leadership ability. As the President, and as the person I voted for, I would like to see him exert that leadership ability in a way that could have a significant impact on resolving the two issues that I feel are our biggest economic concerns for this country. The deficit and personal savings.

IMHO, the best way to make a statement to our politicians that it’s time stop spending money we don’t have is to make a bold statement. The President announcing that he is cancelling or scaling back inauguration parties (yes, i think it’s ok to pay the obligations that are already in place to those planning and supporting the parties) because we have reached a point where have to watch every penny we spend, as a country and as individuals, is one way.I think it could have been the best way,to get the country and the world’s attention for this message. It would have led every media outlet and sent the message loud and clear. When the President sends a clear message that we can’t spend money we don’t have, I believeenough people to make adifference willlisten and follow the Presidents lead. That was the goal of the first post.

The fact that the inauguration party costs weremore thanthe amount of money that was committed to the Tsunami victims at the time I wrote the post created the opportunity to make the message louder and clearer. We are shifting dollars from a celebration to an important obligation.

Some might just believe that the President will get the job done in his own way. I obviously don’t think politicsas usual will get the job done. I don’t think we can legislate our way out of the huge deficits.

Left to their own devices, politicos will do what they always do, spend more money. That is the culture in our government today.The budget is trillions, I’m only asking for millions, so no one will notice and it’s so small, relatively speaking, it doesn’t matter.I would like to see the President take a bold step to change that culture

I think the government leads by example. I don’t think its an accident that our deficits have grown side by side with consumer debt. We have been fortunate that there have been years of lower interest rates to protect all of us. There are no assurances that rates stay low, and even if they do, the sheer size of ourcountry’s debt could overwhelm us.

I would love to seethe Presidentlead by example when it comes to spending, and savings in a way that sends the message loudly and clearly to all of us.

The inauguration parties were a way to do it. We have passed that point. I’m open to all suggestions.

This time, I will keep my ideas to myself.

For now.

One of the tools, and I emphasize the words “one of”, that we use to better understand how the Mavs are performing is
an advanced Plus Minus and Impact analysis. Similar to traditional plus minus systems, we also add a special sauce
that also defines the impact of the plus or minus. A simple way to look at it is that scoring or giving up a score
when you are down 30 with 2 minutes to play is far different than when then when its tied with 2 minutes to play.

We take this information by player and combine it into lineups to determine not just our best lineups, but our
best lineups against the lineups against us. The information is useful as one component of many more. (It doesn’t
take into account the impact of coaching, so its worthless as a stand alone tool. IE, a smart coach knows what
matchups put a player and lineup in the best position to succeed.They know once a player hits 15,20 mins,
whatever, their ability to impact a game is reduced. They know a guy can only succeed in a zone or against a zonet,
etc.)

Where it becomes very useful is in the playoffs, after you have played a team 4 times in the regular season, and
they have played 82 games. Then the data has more validity in team on team matchups, and in understanding which of
the other teams lineups work best or worst. (If they play their worst lineups unknowingly, we may keep matchups to
keep those guys on the floor.)

This isn’t something that Nellie keeps in his pocket to look at during a game, but its something our assistant
coaches know going into games and review for any edges we can get. Sometimes it can help give us an edge a couple
possessions in a playoff game. On the other hand, if we don’t execute, it wont help a bit.

In any event, it’s relatively early in the season, so the numbers are far from conclusive. It is far enough in for
the anamolies to have fallen out relative to the top players. Given some of the things I have been reading in the
basketball media, I wasnt going to, but I decided to post this just for the fun response it would create.

Have fun and no,I won’t post the rest of the scores. And no, I won’t explain everything to you. If you can
figure out what each number means, more power to you. AllI will tell you is that the points on the left is the
index, a plus for offense is good and a minus for defense is good.

******

POINTS= OFFENSE-DEFENSE IMPACT% MINUTES

Z-SCORE PT_WINS ZS_WINS PSALARY$ ZSALARY$ SALARY$ TEAMIN AGE
POS

HT ALGEBRA +/-

1 NYK Stephon Marbury 25.32 19.36 -5.96
68.07% 1179.04

3.2308 20.17_w 19.46_w 27.359$ 26.397$ 0.000$ 1450
(27.86) G

6-2 { 15.66} [ 2.89]

NYK last 3/ 30 24.03
21.59 -2.44 63.30% 123.95

NYK last 5/ 30 27.64
23.90 -3.74 62.95% 204.33

NYK last 8/ 30 20.28
18.28 -2.00 70.14% 327.70

NYK window 6/ 6 tm 22.25 21.55
-0.71 58.36% 238.12

NYK varies 30/ 30 ( 12.98)( 9.21)(
10.54)( 39.97%) 1179.04

2 DAL Dirk Nowitzki 18.66 12.16
-6.50 45.96% 1117.65

2.3013 15.75_w 14.96_w 21.367$ 20.292$ 0.000$ 1450
(26.54) F

7-0 { 20.67} [ 11.77]

DAL last 3/ 29 21.15
20.59 -0.56 40.28% 129.01

DAL last 5/ 29 21.98
21.83 -0.15 32.07% 195.82

DAL last 8/ 29 15.20
14.52 -0.68 29.65% 311.61

DAL window 5/ 5 tm 21.98 21.83
-0.15 32.07% 195.82

DAL varies 29/ 29 ( 16.58)( 12.77)( 11.27)(
37.72%) 1117.65

3 MIN Kevin Garnett 16.96 10.55
-6.41 61.72% 1107.26

2.6772 15.80_w 17.37_w 21.436$ 23.558$ 0.000$ 1354
(28.62) F

6-11 { 11.82} [ 6.50]

MIN last 3/ 28 22.59
9.55 -13.05 85.70% 115.75

MIN last 5/ 28 15.84
7.03 -8.81 62.94% 196.15

MIN last 8/ 28 16.67
7.53 -9.14 57.17% 314.15

MIN window 5/ 5 tm 15.84
7.03 -8.81 62.94% 196.15

MIN varies 28/ 28 ( 12.80)( 10.43)(
9.56)( 37.76%) 1107.26

4 LAL Kobe Bryant 14.23 8.17
-6.06 32.10% 1217.44

1.7088 15.77_w 14.86_w 21.388$ 20.153$ 0.000$ 1354
(26.36) G

6-6 { 20.66} [ 4.34]

LAL last 3/ 28 25.08
17.21 -7.87 59.41% 132.25

LAL last 5/ 28 16.94
8.42 -8.51 39.13% 221.87

LAL last 8/ 28 15.46
11.25 -4.21 34.97% 358.18

LAL window 5/ 5 tm 16.94
8.42 -8.51 39.13% 221.87

LAL varies 28/ 28 ( 13.03)( 11.96)(
7.78)( 39.51%) 1217.44

5 LAC Elton Brand 13.91 7.12
-6.79 50.74% 1044.84

2.1976 12.60_w 13.75_w 17.090$ 18.644$ 0.000$ 1437
(25.81) F

6-8 { 10.87} [ 4.23]

LAC last 3/ 28 21.22
10.08 -11.14 65.04% 113.51

LAC last 5/ 28 11.68
6.65 -5.03 43.51% 166.33

LAC last 8/ 28 8.35
4.66 -3.69 25.17% 282.75

LAC window 6/ 6 tm 10.78
6.51 -4.28 34.89% 215.37

LAC varies 28/ 28 ( 15.32)( 10.00)( 10.74)(
39.15%) 1044.84

6 BOS Paul Pierce 13.29 4.72
-8.58 15.18% 1084.76

1.1507 12.57_w 10.26_w 17.054$ 13.915$ 0.000$ 1460
(27.22) G

6-6 { 6.17} [ 2.04]

BOS last 3/ 30 -0.95
11.70 12.66 -8.52% 109.96

BOS last 5/ 30 3.85
8.97 5.12 -1.00% 174.15

BOS last 8/ 30 9.23
9.77 0.53 32.07% 286.32

BOS window 7/ 7 tm 5.22
9.14 3.92 7.80% 240.88

BOS varies 30/ 30 ( 13.33)( 10.08)( 12.90)(
49.39%) 1084.76

7 DEN Carmelo Anthony 13.19 9.44
-3.74 47.60% 881.31

2.0720 10.28_w 11.16_w 13.941$ 15.133$ 0.000$ 1445
(20.59) F

6-8 { 7.79} [ 1.20]

DEN last 3/ 24 15.12
13.04 -2.07 62.11% 109.40

DEN last 5/ 24 9.93
11.94 2.02 39.74% 191.11

DEN last 8/ 24 16.53
14.89 -1.64 53.23% 307.86

DEN window 2/ 6 tm 13.02 10.75
-2.27 55.28% 80.93

DEN varies 24/ 24 ( 17.31)( 12.31)( 10.56)(
43.15%) 881.31

8 SAS Tim Duncan 11.89 3.44
-8.45 29.66% 1115.16

1.5323 11.62_w 11.37_w 15.762$ 15.427$ 0.000$ 1536
(28.68) F C

6-11 { 15.11} [ 16.36]

SAS last 3/ 32 15.34
4.52 -10.81 41.03% 102.63

SAS last 5/ 32 18.45
7.05 -11.40 51.52% 164.97

SAS last 8/ 32 13.34
2.62 -10.72 40.55% 268.32

SAS window 7/ 7 tm 14.79
2.15 -12.64 45.36% 241.42

SAS varies 32/ 32 ( 14.43)( 10.98)(
9.02)( 39.25%) 1115.16

9 CLE LeBron James 11.86 7.50
-4.35 61.01% 1185.03

2.1339 13.41_w 15.61_w 18.191$ 21.167$ 0.000$ 1412
(20.00) F

6-8 { 10.10} [ 5.39]

CLE last 3/ 29 1.23
9.14 7.91 44.65% 108.38

CLE last 5/ 29 6.50
10.71 4.21 51.01% 194.20

CLE last 8/ 29 7.16
8.16 1.00 41.72% 316.95

CLE window 5/ 5 tm 6.50 10.71
4.21 51.01% 194.20

CLE varies 29/ 29 ( 14.99)( 8.48)(
11.53)( 45.83%) 1185.03

10 SEA Ray Allen 11.74
8.68 -3.06 24.52% 1125.46

1.3775 13.27_w 12.44_w 17.999$ 16.875$ 0.000$ 1349
(29.45) G

6-5 { 13.96} [ 9.43]

SEA last 3/ 28 4.24
11.07 6.83 -3.32% 112.84

SEA last 5/ 28 12.68
12.83 0.15 21.32% 194.79

SEA last 8/ 28 10.48
9.97 -0.52 9.30% 316.27

SEA window 5/ 5 tm 12.68 12.83
0.15 21.32% 194.79

SEA varies 28/ 28 ( 12.58)( 10.83)( 11.06)(
35.29%) 1125.46

It’s time for my next ref stat updates. As usual no names, no claims, just the facts and nothing more or less!

This week once again holds lots of fun facts that you can inspire your friends with.

Total fouls called are still up over last year, but down from my last report. The mean total fouls called are now 46.29, compared with 48.17 in total fouls being called as of last report Dec 12th and 42.73 last year.

The average number of calls by the 3 veteran officials who call the most total fouls is down from 52 last report to about 51, while the average of veteran officials who call the least fouls is about 43.75. Just under last report of 44.

The average number of travels called this year is 2.1, Consistent with my last report.
This compares to 1.52 at the end of last year.

Defensive 3 seconds is called on average .56 times per game (.59 last report). The average number ofcalls by the 3 veteran officials who call def 3 the most is down from 1.5x per game my last report to about 1.25. The least, up to .23x per game from 0.18x per game last report.

Offensive fouls are called on average 4.76 times per game, down from last reports 5.16 times per game. Theaverage number of calls by the 3 veteran officials who call offensive fouls the most is 6 per game, down from 7 per game. The least, 3.8 per game, up from 3.6 per game last report.
Last years number was 3.9 per game.

There are .747 techs called per game. That’s up from .724 techs called per game in the last report and down from .762 per game last year.

The top and bottom averages are about 1.45 per game vs .33 per game.

The best news is that there are some refs who know how to control a game without using technicals. Hopefully they will rub off on the trigger happy ones.

Last by not least, is offensive 3 seconds. There are .7 called per game, down from .794 called in the last report and vs .552 last year. The top and bottom averages are about 1.2 per game vs 0.40 game.

The most interesting observation here is that the most veteran officials are at the bottom of the list.

So now you know everything you always wanted to know about officiating statistics but were afraid to ask.

Thanks again to my daughter for allowing me to experience mainstream culture.

Barney was sharing music and dance with the kids. Baby Bop , Barney and crew got their groove on to Hip Hop.

Not a tatoo in sight.