Advanced Metrics Nonsense

#676
#676
n_huffhines said:
The question is who altered more shots? If they are better on-the-ball defenders, and Wade is the better help defender, I don't know why that means they alter more shots. If they are the better on-the-ball defenders then they are (1) denying their man the ball (2) playing such good D their man should pass the ball (3) taking the ball from him before he shoots.

Wade might not be as good on the ball, but since he's better at help D he is not only altering his own man's shot, he's altering others. Wade could also be excellent at goading his man into taking blockable shots, which would also mean he's goading them into shots he alters but don't go in the stat book.

I think my reasoning makes sense. I'm the only one who seems to realize we don't know without seeing the data. Gahlee is ready to bet his house on it.
Click to expand...

I never said Wade was the better help defender, I said he got a lot of his blocks that way. MJ was the better defender in anyway possible. Also I was asking is you thought Wade was a better defender since he got more blocks. If he's not, then why do you consider MJ and Allen better defenders. I'm sure Wade's stats suggest he is better than Allen, when he definitely isn't. Btw I'm highly doubting Wade is pulling a Deion and try to gode them into taking shots so he can get a block.

I'm willing to bet Gahlees house on it too. :)
 
#678
#678
n_huffhines said:
Dude, this is not a point I made. When a player blows for 7 games it's not hard to evaluate. What's hard to determine is a player's performance over an 82 game season where they experience ups and downs. A guy who starts the season slow and finishes slow is going to get underrated for his season's contribution. A guy who happens to have good games on national TV is going to get overrated for his season's contribution. A guy who scores will tend to be overrated because that's whose mug is on the Sportscenter highlights.

How many rebounds do you have to get before ESPN shows a highlight of one of your rebounds? 20? You can't possibly take the various snap shots of what you see in the league, remember them all, and have enough complete information to accurately rank players for value. It's not happening.

Argue that point, not points I'm not making.
Click to expand...

I never said I could or would rank players and you don't need to remember everything.

I can't tell you if the Blazers 6th man (whomever that might be) is a good player. I don't care enough.

I, like most everyone else easily tell who's having a good game or bad game from what I see without a stat sheet.

I, also like most everyone else can tell who's a good player and who isn't by watching them countless times over the course of a season or their career.

I'm not claiming to be some savant. I'm not. I'm an average fan and to me the average fan (if they watch enough) can easily differentiate between bad and good and from good and great.

The above post seems more directed at someone who watches the highlights and looks at a stat line more so than someone who actually watches the games and makes an opinion off of what they see.

I know a fair amount about a decent portion of the NBA, there are teams and players I know nothing about because I don't get to see them play. In that case I could look at their stats and try to assume, rather than watch and actually see it for myself.

Again, stats are a good reference point in determining value but they cannot be the entire basis for determining value. It's a line of thinking that's extremely flawed, there has to be context, there just has to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#679
#679
BadJerry20 said:
He obviously doesn't like you or your question Nerd. Lol
Click to expand...

He realizes:

depositphotos_2795800-Checkmate.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#680
#680
BadJerry20 said:
Well technically you said top rebounders and scorers. But yes watching games I could tell you LBJ, KD, Westbrook, Love, Melo, Kobe are the top scorers in the league. By watching I could tell you Rodman, Barkley, Ewing, Shaq, Malone, Willis, etc..were top rebounders in the league. Its not exactly rocket surgery to see who scores a lot or who rebounds.
Click to expand...

It's all fairly obvious. All these advances stats really just help define the margins.

"I knew so and so was a really good shooter because I've watched him play for ten years but after checking the stats, he's a little better than I thought".
 
#681
#681
Nerd-Vol said:
He realizes:

depositphotos_2795800-Checkmate.jpg
Click to expand...

Lulz. That, and he thinks Geiger, Ty Hill and Todd McCullough were the reason the 76ers made the finals not AI. Even though AI is one of his favorite players. His efficiency was bad, that monster frontline I mentioned saved him often. Huff and I had this conversation before. When i said that sixers team was the least talented team to make the finals.


I have a good memory. Lol
 
#682
#682
GahLee said:
It's all fairly obvious. All these advances stats really just help define the margins.

"I knew so and so was a really good shooter because I've watched him play for ten years but after checking the stats, he's a little better than I thought".
Click to expand...

Exactly. And I respect Huffs stats and his thoughts on stuff. Hell I don't discuss stuff with people that I don't think has some knowledge. He just seems too wrapped up in numbers. Which makes for good back and forth, which I enjoy. But Ben hates. I see you lurking Ben. :)
 
#683
#683
BadJerry20 said:
Exactly. And I respect Huffs stats and his thoughts on stuff. Hell I don't discuss stuff with people that I don't think has some knowledge. He just seems too wrapped up in numbers. Which makes for good back and forth, which I enjoy. But Ben hates. I see you lurking Ben. :)
Click to expand...

Trust me, you get to a point where you no longer enjoy it.
 
#684
#684
BadJerry20 said:
Exactly. And I respect Huffs stats and his thoughts on stuff. Hell I don't discuss stuff with people that I don't think has some knowledge. He just seems too wrapped up in numbers. Which makes for good back and forth, which I enjoy. But Ben hates. I see you lurking Ben. :)
Click to expand...

-_-

I don't hate that, its you and Gru going back and forth in the UFC thread that i hate lol
 
#685
#685
bentenn said:
-_-

I don't hate that, its you and Gru going back and forth in the UFC thread that i hate lol
Click to expand...

Thats understandable, I just really like making that guy mad. He gets so frustrated when I won't answer him, it makes me chuckle. Lol
 
#686
#686
BadJerry20 said:
Well technically you said top rebounders and scorers. But yes watching games I could tell you LBJ, KD, Westbrook, Love, Melo, Kobe are the top scorers in the league. By watching I could tell you Rodman, Barkley, Ewing, Shaq, Malone, Willis, etc..were top rebounders in the league. Its not exactly rocket surgery to see who scores a lot or who rebounds.
Click to expand...

LOL

How would you know? You don't see all the players. You know because you are told they are top rebounders. You wouldn't know that Kris Humphries was ranked #5 in rebounds last year and that Reggie Evans is # 6 this year, and you'd probably be surprised to find out Roy Hibbert is #19. Would you have known Boozer killed it on the glass this year? I bet you didn't. Yeah you can see that Dwight Howard is a top rebounder, but it would be impossible to know he's #1 in rebounds without the data. You may think you know, but what if you saw 4 Magic games all year, and Vucevic didn't play well in any of them. Would you think he was the #2 rebounder?

Try to name the top 10 from last year and this year. Even having been exposed to their numbers to some degree I bet it's a harder task than you think.
 
#687
#687
Nerd-Vol said:
.
Click to expand...

Do you have an example of a good player that didn't get along with teammates? I don't know that it exists. Winning cures all chemistry issues. Ballhogs like Melo and Iverson aren't good players. Ballhogs like Jordan and Durant are good players. They don't ever have chemistry issues.
 
#688
#688
BadJerry20 said:
Lulz. That, and he thinks Geiger, Ty Hill and Todd McCullough were the reason the 76ers made the finals not AI. Even though AI is one of his favorite players. His efficiency was bad, that monster frontline I mentioned saved him often. Huff and I had this conversation before. When i said that sixers team was the least talented team to make the finals.


I have a good memory. Lol
Click to expand...

Take yourself through this thought process.

How do you get to the Finals?

I'd say you have to be good at a lot of things, or very good at a few things. Do you disagree?

What were the 76ers good at? What is Allen Iverson supposedly good at?

The 76ers didn't reach the finals because they were good at scoring, they reached the finals because they were great at defense and rebounding, and were extremely tough on the interior. Their scoring was just good enough to get them by.

So you can credit Iverson for making them "good enough" at scoring to advance, but he had nothing to do with what they did at an elite level. Why does he get the credit for carrying them? He may have been essential in the equation, but they were leading the way to success.
 
#690
#690
n_huffhines said:
LOL

How would you know? You don't see all the players. You know because you are told they are top rebounders. You wouldn't know that Kris Humphries was ranked #5 in rebounds last year and that Reggie Evans is # 6 this year, and you'd probably be surprised to find out Roy Hibbert is #19. Would you have known Boozer killed it on the glass this year? I bet you didn't. Yeah you can see that Dwight Howard is a top rebounder, but it would be impossible to know he's #1 in rebounds without the data. You may think you know, but what if you saw 4 Magic games all year, and Vucevic didn't play well in any of them. Would you think he was the #2 rebounder?

Try to name the top 10 from last year and this year. Even having been exposed to their numbers to some degree I bet it's a harder task than you think.
Click to expand...

A buddy used to always rocket surgery. lol

I'm not saying I could name the top 10. I would need to see stats for some guys no doubt, mainly cause I can't say I watched Orlando, Toronto, Charlotte etc much. As I said stats are nice and fun. But I don't need them to tell me certain players are good, my eyes can tell me that. I use both honestly.
 
#691
#691
n_huffhines said:
Take yourself through this thought process.

How do you get to the Finals?

I'd say you have to be good at a lot of things, or very good at a few things. Do you disagree?

What were the 76ers good at? What is Allen Iverson supposedly good at?

The 76ers didn't reach the finals because they were good at scoring, they reached the finals because they were great at defense and rebounding, and were extremely tough on the interior. Their scoring was just good enough to get them by.

So you can credit Iverson for making them "good enough" at scoring to advance, but he had nothing to do with what they did at an elite level. Why does he get the credit for carrying them? He may have been essential in the equation, but they were leading the way to success.
Click to expand...

We covered this topic for a few days once. :)
 
#692
#692
BadJerry20 said:
A buddy used to always rocket surgery. lol

I'm not saying I could name the top 10. I would need to see stats for some guys no doubt, mainly cause I can't say I watched Orlando, Toronto, Charlotte etc much. As I said stats are nice and fun. But I don't need them to tell me certain players are good, my eyes can tell me that. I use both honestly.
Click to expand...

Was it Carl?
 
#694
#694
I guess really the issue I have is people say they don't evaluate players based on stats, but I think they have trouble recognizing that they do. They tend to only care about points, assists, and rebounds, but mostly just points.

For instance you look at ROY voting...we know very little about most of the guys because a lot of them are on bad teams and don't play on TV. Who gets voted to ROY? It's almost always the guy who scores the most. The top 10 is usually 7-10 of the top 10 in scoring. As much as we say we don't base our analysis on stats, you know most of these "experts" aren't seeing much more than 50 minutes of Kidd-Gilchrist or Drummond, but they were told Lillard scored the most, and they saw him on Sportscenter a lot, so they voted him ROY.

I'm sure you all have somewhat strong opinions on who the top rookies were, but really how much did you see MKG play?
 
#695
#695
I know I picked Lillard to win it at the beginning of the year. I never said I don't use stats. I use my eyes, then stats to help my evaluation. The problem with stats is a lot of guys put up numbers on bad teams, when they probably wouldn't start on a good team. Thats where numbers can be misleading. IMO
 
#696
#696
BadJerry20 said:
I know I picked Lillard to win it at the beginning of the year. I never said I don't use stats. I use my eyes, then stats to help my evaluation. The problem with stats is a lot of guys put up numbers on bad teams, when they probably wouldn't start on a good team. Thats where numbers can be misleading. IMO
Click to expand...

The stats I value parcel that out. The one problem really is rebounding. If you are on a team with a ton of good rebounders then your numbers will probably fall (which is why I think Boozer was such a beast making the top 10 this year cause Noah was also top 10 and Deng is a good damn rebounder). Other than that, the metrics I like are mostly unaffected by teammates.

Even evaluating passing isn't really affected by teammates or scheme because what really matters is assist to turnover. So if you are in a run and gun offense racking up the assists and have a **** ton of turnovers most of the establishment will value you as a great PG. Advanced metrics are going to put more value on a guy like Conley who is very efficient in the offense he runs.
 
#697
#697
I'm thinking about a guy on the Raptors that puts up good numbers but probably wouldn't start on a decent. Demar Derozen for example. Seems as if comparing him to a guy on a good team would be hard to compare.
 
#698
#698
MJG can't score from more than 4ft from the basket. Stats are great, but there's a lot more to evaluating a player. Games aren't played on paper.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top