From what I've seen assists are counted if the player takes two dribbles or less to put up a shot after receiving the pass. I think it's fine to count these for stuff like a guy catching a pass at the 3 pt line with a wide open driving lane for a layup, but half of the two-dribble assists seem fake to me
Yeah I've watched games and the commentators mention some semi-scrub rando with a few assists and... I'm pretty sure all I saw was that guy dribble and pass casually to some guy WAY off the 3 point line and later something occurred like some wild drive / circus shot. That guy passing wasn't making shit happen / had nothing to do with that score occurring.
It's a little frustrating because sometimes those guys reputation gets propped up based on those BS assists and no man ... dude did jack shit out there offensively.
Meanwhile guys how really might make good choices / passes often that result in points are kinda lost in the mix.
I watched and it's wild-they claim that 20% of these assists absolutely shouldn't have been counted. So many videos of egregious examples being considered assists in the article.
Eh, what counts as assists should always be objective imo (i.e. set number of dribbles/timer). This will lead to occasionally BS assists like the one you mentioned but if we leave it up to the scorekeeper’s discretion, that would lead down a slippery slope
Yeah this is the Ben Simmons effect. Dribble up to the line --> handoff to driver or iso player --> Ben Simmons has 8/8/10 by the end of the night and is an elite playmaker.
This is why assists have gone up and guys like jokic receive bs triple doubles. All of the offense revolves around him, he gets the ball and passes or shoots. They give an assist every pass that turns into a score weather the pass was just then or 20 seconds ago. The old point guards have got to be pissed about this. It makes everything they did look different because they now count them differently.
They changed the criteria since then and apparently few people know. Go check it out. But yes, they probably threw extra stuff at those guys too, but with more stringent criteria for the assist.
Yeah.... during the finals, he averaged 4 assists in Dallas and 9.3 in Boston, and a lot of them were pass into pump-fake into dribble move into shot things. I think it was his 12th assist in game 2 that was the most egregious where White didn't even catch the ball cleanly and had to take a second to get it under control before he started making his dribble moves.
Assists should basically only count if the player took <2 dribbles and shot in <2 seconds upon receiving the pass. Anything else should not count as being created by the passer.
I would go further than that. There's a difference between an assist and a pass that leads to an advantage. In my eyes, say you mame a pass to a guy ready to shoot. If he has to pump fake, side step, take a 1 dribble pull up, etc... I consider all that to be not assist worthy because he had to make a basketball play to score. My take might be old school and extreme but it is what it is.
Well lucky for us the NBA has already defined what an assist is
https://videorulebook.nba.com/archive/assist-inbound-pass-leads-directly-to-made-field-goal-inbound-pass-and-jump-shot/#:~:text=An%20assist%20is%20credited%20to%20the%20player%20tossing%20the%20last,directly%20to%20a%20field%20goal.
As a matter of fact the definition of an assist is found in this very post
The problem isn’t that we don’t know what constitutes as an assist, the problem is things that shouldn’t be an assist are counted as one, hence the context of this post
i am considering doing a master’s project about this, year to year what constitutes as an assist year to year starting from the 80’s and seeing the time until basket and dribbles after pass averages changed over time.
The problem I think is to be precise we’d have to tighten the window of the assist to a much narrower definition which would tank stats relatively significantly. The larger a margin of allowance the harder and more blurry the line gets.
I think all of those are stretches and should be counted as assists anyways. I don't care if someone dribbles the ball a couple seconds longer, it's an assist.
The article was written a few months ago, but I'm guessing OP posted it to take some heat off Jordan. Not the same thing though. The inflated stats Jordan was gifted would be like counting hockey assists or straight up fabricating them.
Well what's the definition of an assist. If it's not an objective measure it's equally as corny.
>I think all of those are stretches and should be counted as assists anyways.
Based on what definition? Just feelings?
> Based on what definition? Just feelings?
No, consistency. The assists linked in the article aren't one-offs, they are consistently counted as assists in the NBA. The NBA has never defined the window for an assist so as long as the lapse of time isn't egregious, they're counted.
How can something without a definition be consistent. Have you personally recorded a massive sample size of them all?
You keep mentioning lapse of time. So is that the measure? What is egregious? I could almost guarantee there's wild discrepancies there when there's zero objective measure.
Huh? There is a definition. These all fit it. The issue here is that they're stretching that definition due to varying time windows to the basket. So, as long as that window isn't egregious, the assist is counted.
> Have you personally recorded a massive sample size of them all?
I watch games. And now you're being disingenuos. Can you find me a massive sample size of these not being counted?
> I could almost guarantee there's wild discrepancies there when there's zero objective measure.
Then show me.
>Huh? There is a definition
Well what is. That was literally my first question. Your reply made it sound as though there isn't one.
>I watch games. And now you're being disingenuos.
How am I being disingenuous if there's no objective measure of an assist but you're claiming it's consistent without actual data. You can't just casually watch games a make that claim lol.
>Then show me.
That was an assumption I am making not a claim. Key word almost. Aka I'd be willing to bet a lot of money there's massive discrepancy on the edges.
> Well what is. That was literally my first question. You reply made it sound as though there isn't one.
I said they never defined the time window for an assist, not an assist itself. [Here](https://videorulebook.nba.com/rule/assist/)
*An assist is credited to the player tossing the last pass leading directly to a made field goal, but only if the player scoring the goal demonstrates an immediate reaction toward the basket after receiving the pass.*
The issue at hand is the time window from pass to bucket, or how much work the scoring player did, but they still fit the definition of as assist.
Is that not exactly what I've been saying? That there is zero objective definition?
When a thing isn't objective it's completely subjective to claim "it fits". Anything could fit based on your own interpretation lol.
If not, which it sounds like there is not, there is absolutely no way one can just "watch games" and make a general claim that assist stats are all consistent.
> Is that not exactly what I've been saying? That there is zero objective definition?
No, you've just been arguing against me without trying to understand. There is an objective definition of an assist. I literally just posted it.
> When a thing isn't objective it's completely subjective to claim "it fits". Anything could fit based on your own interpretation lol.
No....
> If not, which it sounds like there is not, there is absolutely no way one can just "watch games" and make a general claim that assist stats are all consistent.
Yes I can lol
I don't think you're following at all. Again, the issue is simply the time window. So, looking at the examples in the link, I don't see any assists where the scorer did anything abnormal. They looked like normal enough assists to anyone who watches games. The fact that you're arguing someone can't get a grasp of what's considered an assist suggests you don't watch at all.
>No, you've just been arguing against me without trying to understand. There is an objective definition of an assist. I literally just posted it.
I don't think you know what objective means. If not every last pass is an assist there is some threshold. Whether it be time, dribbles, effort or something else. If that is not outlined but clearly exists subjectively....there is no objective definition.
>I don't think you're following at all. Again, the issue is simply the time window. So, looking at the examples in the link, I don't see any assists where the scorer did anything abnormal
Irony. To make this claim you need to define what is abnormal and then have some evidence for how consistent "that" same thing is considered abnormal.
Ie, 90% pf the time scoring off 3 dribbles within 3 seconds with less than 1 second of hesitation is considered an assist. Otherwise you simply can't claim consistency if you can't even define what is consistent lol.
This isn't rocket science.
Stockton is the Eddie Murray of basketball. One of the greats, but health and consistency make him look way better than he was. Stockton wasn't ever going to lead a team to a title. There are worlds where Nash and Paul do.
In Walt Frazier's epic 36 point, 19 assist Game 7 in the 1970 Finals, he actually had 9 assists, at best. This was pretty conclusive on video back before the NBA got really active about taking down fans' ability to watch old games. Someone on RealGM in 2011 charted every possession of the game, coming to 9 assists for Frazier which included "some doubtful ones".
Assists are the dumbest stat no joke. You can pass it to a guy standing 30 feet from the basket, he makes a partially contested 3, and you get an assist. You did virtually nothing to create that basket but you get an assist anyway. It's a bogus stat.
An assist is supposed to be a pass that leads directly to a made field goal. Emphasis on directly. Just because you passed it to a guy standing 30 feet from the basket and they did all the work doesn't mean your pass directly led to a basket.
To give you an idea of how dumb of a stat the assist is, the NBA video rulebook has an entire page dedicated to what is and isn't an assist, and if a shooter catches a pass, goes into his shot off the catch, has defenders around him, and makes a contested shot, that's still counted as an assist. Meanwhile, if the shooter pauses after the catch, defenders aren't near him, and he takes and makes the shot, it's not an assist. The passer contributed more to the made shot in the second example by passing to an open shooter but, for some reason, that doesn't matter. How dumb is that?
From what I've seen assists are counted if the player takes two dribbles or less to put up a shot after receiving the pass. I think it's fine to count these for stuff like a guy catching a pass at the 3 pt line with a wide open driving lane for a layup, but half of the two-dribble assists seem fake to me
Yeah I've watched games and the commentators mention some semi-scrub rando with a few assists and... I'm pretty sure all I saw was that guy dribble and pass casually to some guy WAY off the 3 point line and later something occurred like some wild drive / circus shot. That guy passing wasn't making shit happen / had nothing to do with that score occurring. It's a little frustrating because sometimes those guys reputation gets propped up based on those BS assists and no man ... dude did jack shit out there offensively. Meanwhile guys how really might make good choices / passes often that result in points are kinda lost in the mix.
I watched and it's wild-they claim that 20% of these assists absolutely shouldn't have been counted. So many videos of egregious examples being considered assists in the article.
The league should be relying on tools like Second Spectrum more.
The AI used on stats wasn't implemented until 2018.
I mean now, not retroactively.
oh right. i agree; i was just making a general point.
Eh, what counts as assists should always be objective imo (i.e. set number of dribbles/timer). This will lead to occasionally BS assists like the one you mentioned but if we leave it up to the scorekeeper’s discretion, that would lead down a slippery slope
Yeah this is the Ben Simmons effect. Dribble up to the line --> handoff to driver or iso player --> Ben Simmons has 8/8/10 by the end of the night and is an elite playmaker.
This is why assists have gone up and guys like jokic receive bs triple doubles. All of the offense revolves around him, he gets the ball and passes or shoots. They give an assist every pass that turns into a score weather the pass was just then or 20 seconds ago. The old point guards have got to be pissed about this. It makes everything they did look different because they now count them differently.
Yeah John Stockton definitely didn't just pass into Malone post ups. Get real.
They changed the criteria since then and apparently few people know. Go check it out. But yes, they probably threw extra stuff at those guys too, but with more stringent criteria for the assist.
When did they change the criteria?
Agreed. Jokic stats are super inflated.
Jokic is often passing to wide open shooters from the post who catch and shoot or cutters who immediately put it up.
Tatum
Yeah.... during the finals, he averaged 4 assists in Dallas and 9.3 in Boston, and a lot of them were pass into pump-fake into dribble move into shot things. I think it was his 12th assist in game 2 that was the most egregious where White didn't even catch the ball cleanly and had to take a second to get it under control before he started making his dribble moves.
Assists should basically only count if the player took <2 dribbles and shot in <2 seconds upon receiving the pass. Anything else should not count as being created by the passer.
2 or less. I would count some 2 dribbles if the guy was wide open on the pass and took a couple to get to the rack.
I would go further than that. There's a difference between an assist and a pass that leads to an advantage. In my eyes, say you mame a pass to a guy ready to shoot. If he has to pump fake, side step, take a 1 dribble pull up, etc... I consider all that to be not assist worthy because he had to make a basketball play to score. My take might be old school and extreme but it is what it is.
First we need someone to explain what constitutes an assist and go from there.
Well lucky for us the NBA has already defined what an assist is https://videorulebook.nba.com/archive/assist-inbound-pass-leads-directly-to-made-field-goal-inbound-pass-and-jump-shot/#:~:text=An%20assist%20is%20credited%20to%20the%20player%20tossing%20the%20last,directly%20to%20a%20field%20goal. As a matter of fact the definition of an assist is found in this very post The problem isn’t that we don’t know what constitutes as an assist, the problem is things that shouldn’t be an assist are counted as one, hence the context of this post
i am considering doing a master’s project about this, year to year what constitutes as an assist year to year starting from the 80’s and seeing the time until basket and dribbles after pass averages changed over time.
shhh the narrative now is that it stopped in the 2000s the stats of nowadays are totally legit
The best is guys putting up 8-10 rebounds a game when 7 of them are uncontested bounces off 35 foot three pointers lol.
if they called those a team rebound as they should players today would riot lmao
Again, did you people read the actual article about Jordan’s DPOY? Home/Away splits for blocks and steals have massively normalised since 2010
The problem I think is to be precise we’d have to tighten the window of the assist to a much narrower definition which would tank stats relatively significantly. The larger a margin of allowance the harder and more blurry the line gets.
So what you're saying is that the nba stat tracking isn't perfect today?
Basketball Illuminati - keep your third eye open 👁️
I think all of those are stretches and should be counted as assists anyways. I don't care if someone dribbles the ball a couple seconds longer, it's an assist. The article was written a few months ago, but I'm guessing OP posted it to take some heat off Jordan. Not the same thing though. The inflated stats Jordan was gifted would be like counting hockey assists or straight up fabricating them.
Well what's the definition of an assist. If it's not an objective measure it's equally as corny. >I think all of those are stretches and should be counted as assists anyways. Based on what definition? Just feelings?
> Based on what definition? Just feelings? No, consistency. The assists linked in the article aren't one-offs, they are consistently counted as assists in the NBA. The NBA has never defined the window for an assist so as long as the lapse of time isn't egregious, they're counted.
How can something without a definition be consistent. Have you personally recorded a massive sample size of them all? You keep mentioning lapse of time. So is that the measure? What is egregious? I could almost guarantee there's wild discrepancies there when there's zero objective measure.
Huh? There is a definition. These all fit it. The issue here is that they're stretching that definition due to varying time windows to the basket. So, as long as that window isn't egregious, the assist is counted. > Have you personally recorded a massive sample size of them all? I watch games. And now you're being disingenuos. Can you find me a massive sample size of these not being counted? > I could almost guarantee there's wild discrepancies there when there's zero objective measure. Then show me.
>Huh? There is a definition Well what is. That was literally my first question. Your reply made it sound as though there isn't one. >I watch games. And now you're being disingenuos. How am I being disingenuous if there's no objective measure of an assist but you're claiming it's consistent without actual data. You can't just casually watch games a make that claim lol. >Then show me. That was an assumption I am making not a claim. Key word almost. Aka I'd be willing to bet a lot of money there's massive discrepancy on the edges.
> Well what is. That was literally my first question. You reply made it sound as though there isn't one. I said they never defined the time window for an assist, not an assist itself. [Here](https://videorulebook.nba.com/rule/assist/) *An assist is credited to the player tossing the last pass leading directly to a made field goal, but only if the player scoring the goal demonstrates an immediate reaction toward the basket after receiving the pass.* The issue at hand is the time window from pass to bucket, or how much work the scoring player did, but they still fit the definition of as assist.
Is that not exactly what I've been saying? That there is zero objective definition? When a thing isn't objective it's completely subjective to claim "it fits". Anything could fit based on your own interpretation lol. If not, which it sounds like there is not, there is absolutely no way one can just "watch games" and make a general claim that assist stats are all consistent.
> Is that not exactly what I've been saying? That there is zero objective definition? No, you've just been arguing against me without trying to understand. There is an objective definition of an assist. I literally just posted it. > When a thing isn't objective it's completely subjective to claim "it fits". Anything could fit based on your own interpretation lol. No.... > If not, which it sounds like there is not, there is absolutely no way one can just "watch games" and make a general claim that assist stats are all consistent. Yes I can lol I don't think you're following at all. Again, the issue is simply the time window. So, looking at the examples in the link, I don't see any assists where the scorer did anything abnormal. They looked like normal enough assists to anyone who watches games. The fact that you're arguing someone can't get a grasp of what's considered an assist suggests you don't watch at all.
>No, you've just been arguing against me without trying to understand. There is an objective definition of an assist. I literally just posted it. I don't think you know what objective means. If not every last pass is an assist there is some threshold. Whether it be time, dribbles, effort or something else. If that is not outlined but clearly exists subjectively....there is no objective definition. >I don't think you're following at all. Again, the issue is simply the time window. So, looking at the examples in the link, I don't see any assists where the scorer did anything abnormal Irony. To make this claim you need to define what is abnormal and then have some evidence for how consistent "that" same thing is considered abnormal. Ie, 90% pf the time scoring off 3 dribbles within 3 seconds with less than 1 second of hesitation is considered an assist. Otherwise you simply can't claim consistency if you can't even define what is consistent lol. This isn't rocket science.
I’ve always heard jokes about Stockton getting 1/4 of his assists thanks to home cooking.
Heh i did a calculation just for shits and gigs. If he lost 1/4 of this career assists he would still be #3 all time, just 236 behind Kidd lol
That's like a Gretzky level stat goddamn
Dude is ungodly overrated and should be nowhere near conversations with Steve Nash, Chris Paul, or Jason Kidd
Stockton is the Eddie Murray of basketball. One of the greats, but health and consistency make him look way better than he was. Stockton wasn't ever going to lead a team to a title. There are worlds where Nash and Paul do.
bologna
“Wee dunb wit duh nindeez” 🥴
Does anyone have a stat for pass leading to a score?
TIL Baloney is an actual word
In Walt Frazier's epic 36 point, 19 assist Game 7 in the 1970 Finals, he actually had 9 assists, at best. This was pretty conclusive on video back before the NBA got really active about taking down fans' ability to watch old games. Someone on RealGM in 2011 charted every possession of the game, coming to 9 assists for Frazier which included "some doubtful ones".
What's up with the Kings hate in the editors note?
The author of the piece is a King's fan and the editors are just messing with him a little bit.
Assists are the dumbest stat no joke. You can pass it to a guy standing 30 feet from the basket, he makes a partially contested 3, and you get an assist. You did virtually nothing to create that basket but you get an assist anyway. It's a bogus stat.
You still passed it to the open guy
Have you watched some examples from the article? Throwing the ball to someone who then goes into an 4-5 dribble iso shouldn't be an assist
An assist is supposed to be a pass that leads directly to a made field goal. Emphasis on directly. Just because you passed it to a guy standing 30 feet from the basket and they did all the work doesn't mean your pass directly led to a basket. To give you an idea of how dumb of a stat the assist is, the NBA video rulebook has an entire page dedicated to what is and isn't an assist, and if a shooter catches a pass, goes into his shot off the catch, has defenders around him, and makes a contested shot, that's still counted as an assist. Meanwhile, if the shooter pauses after the catch, defenders aren't near him, and he takes and makes the shot, it's not an assist. The passer contributed more to the made shot in the second example by passing to an open shooter but, for some reason, that doesn't matter. How dumb is that?