Who Gains/Loses the Most if Advanced Stats Come 20 Years Ealier

[Jamiecballer]

The first and last years of Iverson's career were the only seasons of his entire career in which he posted a negative RAPM (ranked amoung the top 10 in SGs everyone of those years). Monta Ellis? He has done so every year of his career. Never a positive statistical player.

Not a good comparison by any means.

They both play the game for themselves first and foremost, and the statistics are awfully similar. i don't know which ones you are looking at. Not saying identical, but close. they both shoot (shot) at a low enough percentage to indicate they didn't seem to know they were hurting their teams by doing so.


The biggest difference is the way basketball fans no longer embrace the notion of a solo gunslinger on the court. If you swapped the two of them in time Allen Iverson never becomes as big as star. A superstar? Sure. But not one that is revered the way Iverson was in the early 2000's. Ellis is a perfect example of how the attitudes in basketball have changed. He produces 90% of what Iverson did and gets the cold shoulder.

That's more of an "eye" comparison than a statistical.

you are talking to a guy who hasn't had tv in more than 6 years. the only times i've seen him play have been games against my raptors. this opinion is based on things other than the "eye".

[Tony_Starks]

Who gains the most are obscure players. Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

[ManRamForPrez24]

Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

I don't get this statement.

[abe_froman]

True, even today the majority of the common NBA fan doesn't know much about statistical analysis. Just look at some of the posts in this thread. Total airheads

this.

there's still too much resistance to it for thread like this,instead of staying on topic,getting answers to the op's question,and civil discussion.it will continue to be derailed as it hasnt come to a state of general acceptance by fans(like you said,airheads).change is hard and frightening to most people

[Chronz]

Who gains the most are obscure players. Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

How so, my love for the game has only grown now that I understand it more.

[ManRamForPrez24]

lol@ advanced stats

Advanced stats are for nerds who could never play basketball and wanted to find a way to get back at the athletes that could

Anyone who is more proud to "side" with this crap, rather than people that use empirically based tools (advanced stats) along with other factors (eyez, etc.) to formulate as close to an all-encompassing way to assess things is, well, [insert insult]

To completely dismiss the telling power of advanced stats is as foolish as it gets.

[bagwell368]

lol@ advanced stats

Advanced stats are for nerds who could never play basketball and wanted to find a way to get back at the athletes that could

Former D1 player here that found advanced stats a few years ago, and they crush "traditional stats".

I've seen for myself what laundry and announders pushing the 'star' of the game does to the average fan, which is why I also turn off the local Celt broadcast and TNT both. If you can't follow a game that way - then I suggest such a person really does not know the game and/or is overly influenced by what they are told.

[Tony_Starks]

How so, my love for the game has only grown now that I understand it more.

You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

[JerseyPalahniuk]

You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

hahaha like JB and his "Durant had more PPG and had a better Fg% than Lebron in the finals so he outplayed him" argument

[ManRamForPrez24]

You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

You think people that care enough to post about sports on a message board like this DON'T watch basketball?

[JasonJohnHorn]

I honestly don't think they change much. Advance stats help contextualize regular stats, but people have always been able to tell when a guys stats are inflated or make him look better than he actually is.

A lot of GMs still sign guys to crazy contracts even when their advance stats suggest other stats are inflated. And coaches put on players who are game changers, even if their stats don't always indicate the impact they have on the court.

It just gives fans of the game more to talk about.

[Chronz]

You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

rly no idea wat u mean, people say dumb **** regardless

[Tony_Starks]

You think people that care enough to post about sports on a message board like this DON'T watch basketball?

Come on man. You've been around long enough to know that some of the most preposterous statements on here often come under the guise of advanced stats.

You know this.

[abe_froman]

You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

everyone here watches games,there's no rule to say you cant do both watch games and try to have a deeper understanding of it by looking at stats.besides,do you watch every game? i'm guess not,so how can you form an pinion then since the only credible way to speak on is to have watched it?

they spout stats in their posts because its an objective standard ,because everything you say just from "i saw" is your opinion,totally subjective.why should i take just you word for something? thats why we use stats and objective,unbiased account of what happened in so far as what we can quantify

[Shlumpledink]

I don't think basketball is a game that lets you base your opinion on stats. You don't have to be smart to recognize that stats and watching the games give you two different pictures. Sometimes they overlap, sometimes they don't.

I realize a large percentage of the nation bases their view of players based on their stats. It's kind of a simplistic system that lets people get their views across, and share their takes with other people who don't watch their team's games. Defensive player of the year is picked based on simple counting stats. MVP is picked off of simple counting stats. It takes a lot of having to watch basketball out of the equation when you can just find the best team, then pick the player with the best stats.

I don't mind the stats, I think they're interesting to look at. I don't like basing my opinions off of stats. People under/over achieve all the time, and matchups are a big part of the equation, as well as personnel and the system they play in both offensively and defensively. You lose a lot of individual games when you look at end of the season statistics.