Quote Originally Posted by R13 View Post
Jesus Christ. Everyone gets ratio's, I thought. Though I'm pretty sure it's 3:1 to 4:1, don't pretend to give me some lesson on ratio's when you're screwing it all to hell. Nash has 486 assists, with 157 turnovers, that is not a 2:1 ratio, that's 3:1. Paul has 476 to 114, that sure as hell isn't 8:1, that's 4:1. Now try again, that's not going to work when I have the numbers a click away.
I was using made up numbers genius, thats why I put PG1 and PG2.
I posted the Nash/Paul numbers several times; the numbers I used with PG1 and 2 are made up numbers to pose a hypothetical. The facts are, Paul's A/TO ratio is a whole unit higher than Nashs, as I pointed out several times in my other posts and you pointed out right there.


Now moving on from that, you're not getting fast pace doesn't equals more possessions, but throwing high-risk passes. This isn't a half court, swing the ball around possessions, this is higher risk transition running/passing, the turnovers are always higher than it normally would be and especially with Nash in that situation when he's running the break 95% of the time and when in the game period he is running everything 99% of the time.
Wrong again. For every hard pass in transition a team gets an easy look with advantage, whether its 2 on 1, 3 on 2, etc..
Theres also no way to substantiate that, so you cant use that as an excuse.


As Stripes pointed out, the TEAMS are only separated by 1 turnover per game. If your theory was right (its not), then PHX would average considerably more turnovers and assists. But since they dont, it throws your theory out the window.

Its a fact dude, assist to turnover ratio is unaffected by pace, since BOTH variables increase when the number of possessions increase.