PDA

View Full Version : Are Advanced Stats Telling the Story?



Pages : [1] 2

basketfan4life
10-02-2011, 05:42 AM
First of all, i'm beggin all of you don't turn this into baiting .The real subject here is advanced stats.
Also i'd be glad if guys like Hawkeye, Bruno, Advanced24,Swashcuff, ManRam,Ralph12,Stebo,JordansBulls,Tredigs, the guy who has Dexter in his avatar(sorry i couldn't remember your user name,corey or something) and everyone share their opinion...

Are advanced stats telling us the whole story? Because some people act as it is exact science...But who is to say one point equals one rebound and that equals one dime, or is it saying that? if not how can it truly elaborate these stats' values against eachother?
While i think rebounding rate is a very good way to measure how good a rebounder a player is, i don't know if PER or Ws use rebounding rate or actual rebound numbers?İf it uses rebound numbers i think there you have a weak point.

As for assists, i don't think every assist worths equal, while i admit Rajon Rondo is a great passer, it's easier for him to dish all those dimes with the players around him, on the other hand Kidd in NJ, Paul in NO earned almost every dime they had, it depends a lot to the players you have around you and how good scorers/shooters/creators they are. For example, some people say Kobe made the most important assist of game 7 of the '10 finals, but come on, Artest nailed that three with a hand in his face and in no way i can give credit Kobe for that play.

But my main problem with Advanced stats is, it doesn't calculate how much ball domination a player needs to put up all these stats? How many seconds per possession it takes for a player to dish a dime or score the ball. Because i firmly truely believe that you don't make players around you better by assisting to them but letting them play with the ball, make your presence mean a lot when you don't have the ball in your hands and still be productive stats wise. This is where i have a problem with the style of play LeBron or maybe C.Paul has...Here is an example of LeBron; he put up 41-7-9-2-1 on 11-28 fg and 18-24 ft against Magic on game 3 of 09 conf finals. These are great stats but you know what, he only made 2 jumpers on that game tried to drrible way too much(i mean real much) still handed 9 assists, you know how much that takes away from other's games or how much of a ball domination it takes to do these? Now some of you can automatically say you are crazy if you think lebron doesn't make others better but takes away from their game, but at the same time you can think of it a little bit.do you know how many 3 point attemps mo will had on that game? 10, heck even big Z had 3 attemps behind the arc. İf you think all of those were bad choices i say think again(in no way i'm saying lebron had great cast around him but the style of play he had didn't help either). Now coming this season finals, he deferred to wade a lot but couldn't keep himself productive the way he should be, i remember Amare scoring almost 40ppg against spurs when losing the series but it was nothing like ball domination, he was everything on offense from what i want from my first offensive weapon, or Kobe against suns in '10 and against Nugggets in 09...i can name these series from Kobe and Amare epic, but i can't say the same about Lebron against Magic, but i'm not sure if advanced stats agree with me, i'm not sure if advanced stats tells the story of how effective just the presence of Dwight either. Also it becomes easier for planning defensive strategies for great defensive teams when you need the ball in your hands to be productive.

Now, i'm not saying Kobe is a better player than LeBron now, because at this point of their carreers he is not...İf i have a subpar team and i need a star i take LeBron over Kobe anyday of the week,and he can still lead them to 55 wins...But if i already have a real good team come playoff time and need a star i take Kobe over LeBron because i'd think he meshes better...This is the exact same reason i think Wade is a better player than Lebron now.In the regular season mostly LeBron had the ball in his hand and wade still put up superstar numbers, but in the finals with the different scenario we saw what happened. But advanced stats say lebron was the best player last year.İ can't imagine kobe-wade, 35 year old mj-wade, durant-wade,melo-wade tandems losing to Mavs last year and i think there is a reason behind it.

Lastly is Lebron worse of a player compared to year before, hell no...İ think he made some improvements...But advanced stats say he was better in '10 than 11, circumstances does not matter,players around you does not matter.But in reality he had wade and bosh with him and he shared the ball more...

Now please keep this sane, the real subject is not lebron he was just an example who can bring most attention to topic. Advanced stats are the real subject here and please keep it that way.

MTar786
10-02-2011, 05:53 AM
no

YoungOne
10-02-2011, 06:03 AM
watching and analysing games telling the story...

asandhu23
10-02-2011, 06:40 AM
Advanced Stats is a better way of understanding how players do on the court BUT it doesn't tell us everything.

MTar786
10-02-2011, 08:06 AM
watching and analysing games telling the story...

This


advanced stats geeks need to learn this

allSUAVE
10-02-2011, 08:21 AM
No

Andrew32
10-02-2011, 08:30 AM
Obviously they dont tell the whole story.

The best way is to actually watch the games or read the play by play and then and only then can you properly use those stats because you understand the context of which they came in.

Advanced Stats can and do tell alot about players but you need to understand the context of the games also or your opinions will be severely weakened.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
10-02-2011, 08:32 AM
they say about 80%

jericho
10-02-2011, 08:42 AM
no watching the game tells you the story you can actually see who is good that way ex. is way to diff when you go 9/9 and all your shots where wide open to having the shots contested the numbers dont how you got them they just tell you that numbers and thats it it doesnt tell last second shot if you were battleling with somebody else for the board the picks screens how you ran the floor and all those lil details that make good players great

Knicks21
10-02-2011, 08:46 AM
Watching the game tells the story. On ball defence when there isnt a score, smart passing, ball movement, help defence, effort.

PrettyBoyJ
10-02-2011, 09:03 AM
Advance stats don't take game scenarios into consideration.. Like when ppl say kobe isnt really clutch, but don't look at the bigger picture and how Kobe is doubled and some times triple teamed to get off one shot to win a game.. Sometimes there useful sometimes their misleading

daleja424
10-02-2011, 09:06 AM
They are evolving... and they are getting pretty good.

But no stat is perfect

I rarely find that a stat lies though...

Andrew32
10-02-2011, 09:18 AM
nvm.

jericho
10-02-2011, 09:47 AM
i know is not advanced numbers but still the numbers dont tell you the hole story i got to examples:
1 reggie miller 31 pts 5 rebs 4 ast 4stl 7/18 fg 3/7 3pts 14/15 ft
2 tracy mcgrady 33pts 8 reb 2 ast 5stl 12/29 fg 5/12 3pts 4/4 ft
now those numbers look good for both of them but it doesnt tell you in what game who they got them against or how they got them now on the miller game he was playing against my fav team 1 of the beast defenseive teams in the 90s it was against the knicks you know the game were he scored 8 pts on 11secs
and the tmac game was against the spurs 13 on 33secs against who used to be called the best 1 on 1 defender back then in bruce bowen
again numbers tell 1 part of the story but unless you dont see the games you dont know what you are talking about

Swashcuff
10-02-2011, 09:49 AM
They tell the story that they were made to tell tell. If you want them to tell you something else then don't even bother attempting to assess them.

Gaining a comprehensive understanding of the stats (not only of an individual but the league, counterparts, teammates etc) would help one understand why players rank where they are in each category.

Stats are NOT everything they only way to tell the story is watch the game, read the summaries, articles, books, blogs (those that make sense), find out as much as you can about the game plans, systems and coaches philosophy before and after each game and do a complete statistical analysis.

Hustlenomics
10-02-2011, 09:56 AM
No. You have to watch the games too

Hawkeye15
10-02-2011, 10:04 AM
They don't tell us everything. They are a very reliable, unbiased tool to use in order to evaluate players and teams, but unless you watch a specific player or team play, you won't get a complete grasp of them with only statistics.

The advanced statistics movement in the NBA has come a long way. Its getting tougher and tougher to pick apart a lot of the information offered now. As someone said previous, there are not many statistics that are a lie. They show us what our biased eyes don't about our favorite players.

All in all, I would suggest any avid basketball fan embrace them, and learn them, to further your understanding of basketball. Are they everything? of course not. But they are a great tool for understanding the differences your eyes may not detect.

Hawkeye15
10-02-2011, 10:06 AM
I will add after reading the entire OP now, that there is a common theme amongst people who hate advanced stats. Their favorite player falls short in the conversation most times. There are very few Allen Iverson, Carmelo Anthony, or Kobe Bryant fans, who really buy into advanced stats, because they paint a different picture than their fans minds do.

Swashcuff
10-02-2011, 10:11 AM
Advance stats don't take game scenarios into consideration.. Like when ppl say kobe isnt really clutch, but don't look at the bigger picture and how Kobe is doubled and some times triple teamed to get off one shot to win a game.. Sometimes there useful sometimes their misleading

Clutch stats aren't advanced stats however. It's basic. I understand your POV and fully agree that those stats don't take everything into consideration though.

blastmasta26
10-02-2011, 11:43 AM
Basic per game stats are considerably flawed, there is no denying that. So advanced stats are the only statistics that should be relied on, but they should not be the only source of information you use to analyze basketball. You have to watch the games too, and take into account external factors that some stats can't measure. Following advanced stats alone is incorrect, but watching the games alone is also incorrect, since one's biases are very influential. True analysis is watching as many games as you can, and using advanced stats to support or counter arguments and beliefs.

KnicksorBust
10-02-2011, 11:55 AM
What I love is that the people who dislike advanced stats say things like this:


watching and analysing games telling the story...


This


advanced stats geeks need to learn this


No

And the people who like advanced stats say things like this:


Advanced Stats is a better way of understanding how players do on the court BUT it doesn't tell us everything.


They tell the story that they were made to tell tell. If you want them to tell you something else then don't even bother attempting to assess them.

Gaining a comprehensive understanding of the stats (not only of an individual but the league, counterparts, teammates etc) would help one understand why players rank where they are in each category.

Stats are NOT everything they only way to tell the story is watch the game, read the summaries, articles, books, blogs (those that make sense), find out as much as you can about the game plans, systems and coaches philosophy before and after each game and do a complete statistical analysis.


They don't tell us everything. They are a very reliable, unbiased tool to use in order to evaluate players and teams, but unless you watch a specific player or team play, you won't get a complete grasp of them with only statistics.

The advanced statistics movement in the NBA has come a long way. Its getting tougher and tougher to pick apart a lot of the information offered now. As someone said previous, there are not many statistics that are a lie. They show us what our biased eyes don't about our favorite players.

All in all, I would suggest any avid basketball fan embrace them, and learn them, to further your understanding of basketball. Are they everything? of course not. But they are a great tool for understanding the differences your eyes may not detect.

I like there is a lot to be learned just on how people respond to this question.

Hustlenomics
10-02-2011, 11:57 AM
^ When they argue they swear stats are everything

Corey
10-02-2011, 12:02 PM
Advance statistics are becoming more and more accurate, however you have to use good judgement when assessing a player with stats. Every situation is different, and statistics can never tell the FULL story.

I love them though, and they definitely help.

likemystylez
10-02-2011, 12:10 PM
LOL- all the stats are just for talk.... the only stat that matters is in the win/loss department. The win/loss stat isnt too advanced. If you are a player who is putting up amazing individual stats, but your team is not winning games, the best player on the winningest team is probably going to be considered better than you.

many years ago, I think it was 93... I remember watching a Suns sonics game in the play offs. At half time one of the commentators asked Charles Barkley

" Going into the half the score is tied. What do you feel your team needs to do differently in the second half to win this game?

Barkley: We need to score more points than them. (With a completely serious face)


LOL see the commentators wanted to hear something like "We need to keep their field goal precentage below 48%, or "we need to keep them to under 17 free throws", or "Our back court has to outscore their back court" or "We need to beat them in fast break points and second chance points" or "When our bench out scores the opposition we are 42-4 this season"

All that crap doesnt matter when your in the middle of the game. You find a way to win... and there isnt a textbook way to accomplish that. The team that scores more points than their opponent in a game has won every single game in the history of the sport. Thats the only advanced stat you need to worry about.

smith&wesson
10-02-2011, 12:24 PM
what do stats really tell ?
If wade and lebron played one vs one who would win ? if lebrons stats are better then wades does that mean he is the better player ? wade has a ship and lebron doesnt is that because of circumstance ? so circumstance and luck play as much part in winning a ship as talent does ? if you play for a crap team your stats are inflated. if you play for a good team your stats are deflated.

I think stats will tell you what areas the player excells in, what areas he can improve on, his impact on the game etc... but they dont tell all.

blastmasta26
10-02-2011, 12:36 PM
LOL- all the stats are just for talk.... the only stat that matters is in the win/loss department. The win/loss stat isnt too advanced. If you are a player who is putting up amazing individual stats, but your team is not winning games, the best player on the winningest team is probably going to be considered better than you.

many years ago, I think it was 93... I remember watching a Suns sonics game in the play offs. At half time one of the commentators asked Charles Barkley

" Going into the half the score is tied. What do you feel your team needs to do differently in the second half to win this game?

Barkley: We need to score more points than them. (With a completely serious face)


LOL see the commentators wanted to hear something like "We need to keep their field goal precentage below 48%, or "we need to keep them to under 17 free throws", or "Our back court has to outscore their back court" or "We need to beat them in fast break points and second chance points" or "When our bench out scores the opposition we are 42-4 this season"

All that crap doesnt matter when your in the middle of the game. You find a way to win... and there isnt a textbook way to accomplish that. The team that scores more points than their opponent in a game has won every single game in the history of the sport. Thats the only advanced stat you need to worry about.

That's a heavily flawed argument and gross oversimplification of basketball as a whole. Basketball is a sport which is influenced by star players and individuals more than some other sports, but still is dependent on team play. An incredible player that wins less is inferior to another player just because he wins more? No, you have to look at the contribution each player has on the team and the game. That's how you know when a player is doing as much as he can but he is being repressed by his supporting cast.

Hawkeye15
10-02-2011, 01:26 PM
LOL- all the stats are just for talk.... the only stat that matters is in the win/loss department. The win/loss stat isnt too advanced. If you are a player who is putting up amazing individual stats, but your team is not winning games, the best player on the winningest team is probably going to be considered better than you.

many years ago, I think it was 93... I remember watching a Suns sonics game in the play offs. At half time one of the commentators asked Charles Barkley

" Going into the half the score is tied. What do you feel your team needs to do differently in the second half to win this game?

Barkley: We need to score more points than them. (With a completely serious face)


LOL see the commentators wanted to hear something like "We need to keep their field goal precentage below 48%, or "we need to keep them to under 17 free throws", or "Our back court has to outscore their back court" or "We need to beat them in fast break points and second chance points" or "When our bench out scores the opposition we are 42-4 this season"

All that crap doesnt matter when your in the middle of the game. You find a way to win... and there isnt a textbook way to accomplish that. The team that scores more points than their opponent in a game has won every single game in the history of the sport. Thats the only advanced stat you need to worry about.


Its a team game. In team sports, you attempt to evaluate players individually. The only sports where your assessment make sense are sports like tennis, when wins and losses is the way to measure an athlete.

Trade Love for Gasol. Is Love a lot better player now because his surrounding roster gives him 40 more wins? Of course not. Is Gasol no good now because he is surrounded by crap that gives him 17 wins? No, he isn't.

Tony_Starks
10-02-2011, 01:32 PM
Advanced stats give you a glimpse but from what I've seen people basically just use them as a crutch to win arguments. They provide a lot of useful info but if you rely on them solely they can still be very skewed. Take the advanced stats of a great player on a horrible team. Just looking at his stats they would blow you away but what the stats don't tell you is that a lot of the games are blowouts and he's putting up numbers in garbage time.

Or take the advance stats of a great player on a great team. His stats may not be that impressive but what they don't tell you is he team may be so good that he can coast and turn it up when need be.

Tony_Starks
10-02-2011, 01:34 PM
Its a team game. In team sports, you attempt to evaluate players individually. The only sports where your assessment make sense are sports like tennis, when wins and losses is the way to measure an athlete.

Trade Love for Gasol. Is Love a lot better player now because his surrounding roster gives him 40 more wins? Of course not. Is Gasol no good now because he is surrounded by crap that gives him 17 wins? No, he isn't.


I don't know if that one is exactly a fair comparison. Gasol never had an outstanding roster in Memphis and still managed to take them from a lottery team to a playoff team as the leader, albeit he did have excellent coaches.

smith&wesson
10-02-2011, 01:49 PM
I don't know if that one is exactly a fair comparison. Gasol never had an outstanding roster in Memphis and still managed to take them from a lottery team to a playoff team as the leader, albeit he did have excellent coaches.

thats his point though. you take gasol and and put him on championship caliber lakers team and his stats are bound to drop while differing to kobe . u take that same player and put him on a team with scrubs and he stats become inflated... how does his stats tell you how good he is in this scenerio ? its based on your teams circumstance. gasol on the t.wolves would be the best player hands down. on the lakers he becomes the 2nd or 3rd best player and naturally he loses touches. is he a better player on a crap team ? no he just gets more touches, more playing time, he becomes more of a focal point where as on ship team he may have to differ to a kobe bryant or a lebron james etc.. same player two different circumstances.

somthing like bosh going from 24 & 12 on a crap toronto team to 18 & 8 on a contending heat team.

KnicksorBust
10-02-2011, 01:54 PM
Advanced stats give you a glimpse but from what I've seen people basically just use them as a crutch to win arguments. They provide a lot of useful info but if you rely on them solely they can still be very skewed. Take the advanced stats of a great player on a horrible team. Just looking at his stats they would blow you away but what the stats don't tell you is that a lot of the games are blowouts and he's putting up numbers in garbage time.

Or take the advance stats of a great player on a great team. His stats may not be that impressive but what they don't tell you is he team may be so good that he can coast and turn it up when need be.

I don't find this to be true at all. Advanced statistics tend to overwhelming support the Jordans-Birds-Magics of the world.

Tony_Starks
10-02-2011, 01:59 PM
thats his point though. you take gasol and and put him on championship caliber lakers team and his stats are bound to drop while differing to kobe . u take that same player and put him on a team with scrubs and he stats become inflated... how does his stats tell you how good he is in this scenerio ? its based on your teams circumstance. gasol on the t.wolves would be the best player hands down. on the lakers he becomes the 2nd or 3rd best player and naturally he loses touches. is he a better player on a crap team ? no he just gets more touches, more playing time, he becomes more of a focal point where as on ship team he may have to differ to a kobe bryant or a lebron james etc.. same player two different circumstances.

somthing like bosh going from 24 & 12 on a crap toronto team to 18 & 8 on a contending heat team.


I get all at but my point is Gasol had a not so great team and still made them respectable whereas Love had a not so great team and they were a laughing stock so to me a comparison between those two is way off.

But I totally get the same player on a different team, different stats scenario. Thats why I take advanced stats with a grain of salt because there are so many other things to factor in that the stat sheet doesn't tell you....

Baller1
10-02-2011, 02:05 PM
They tell about 90% of what you need to know. Numbers don't lie, it's as simple as that.

There's always room for opinion, intangibles, and actual direct analysis, but for the most part, advanced statistics are going to tell you most of what you're trying to find.

Swashcuff
10-02-2011, 02:05 PM
I get all at but my point is Gasol had a not so great team and still made them respectable whereas Love had a not so great team and they were a laughing stock so to me a comparison between those two is way off.

That's where like I said earlier you need to assess the teammates, system, coaches, counter-parts etc of each respective player before we can simply say that Love isn't as good. When we're talking about team performance we can't just say Love didn't make his team better and that's why he isn't good. There are many many factors that go into that other than just the play of the team's best player.

Think of where the Wolves would be without Kevin Love. The Wolves went 0-9 without Love last season, do you see them honestly winning more than 10 games if he wasn't playing at the high level in which he did? Also do you think Memphis's version of Pau Gasol could make that team a 25+ win team? I highly doubt you'd even think he'd be able to take them to the post season.

Tony_Starks
10-02-2011, 02:15 PM
That's where like I said earlier you need to assess the teammates, system, coaches, counter-parts etc of each respective player before we can simply say that Love isn't as good. When we're talking about team performance we can't just say Love didn't make his team better and that's why he isn't good. There are many many factors that go into that other than just the play of the team's best player.

Think of where the Wolves would be without Kevin Love. The Wolves went 0-9 without Love last season, do you see them honestly winning more than 10 games if he wasn't playing at the high level in which he did? Also do you think Memphis's version of Pau Gasol could make that team a 25+ win team? I highly doubt you'd even think he'd be able to take them to the post season.


I honestly think the Memphis Gasol would've got them more wins. Probably not much more, but still more simply because he's a bigger low post threat and demands a double. But I do agree with you as far as system and coaches advantages because Gasol had Mike Fratello and Hubie Brown and Love had a first time coach who looked completely lost.

I think Gasol is a much better player but then again we've had the advantage of seeing him play on a poor team, a good team, and overseas and he's always had a big impact on winning. I guess I would really have to see Love's impact on a solid team.....

Swashcuff
10-02-2011, 02:22 PM
I honestly think the Memphis Gasol would've got them more wins. Probably not much more, but still more simply because he's a bigger low post threat and demands a double. But I do agree with you as far as system and coaches advantages because Gasol had Mike Fratello and Hubie Brown and Love had a first time coach who looked completely lost.

I think Gasol is a much better player but then again we've had the advantage of seeing him play on a poor team, a good team, and overseas and he's always had a big impact on winning. I guess I would really have to see Love's impact on a solid team.....

We've also have the advantage of seeing him at his very peak while Kevin Love just played his 3rd season and more importantly first as a starter. By Pau's 3rd season he already had 2 seasons as a starter learning how to win and how not to win as a team's best player. He also had a better supporting cast than Love and well you already spoke of coaching ans system.

I'd probably agree though that Pau may have led the Wolves to more wins (maybe two or three) but his impact would not have been resounding. His all round play probably is more conducive to winning basketball.

smith&wesson
10-02-2011, 02:59 PM
I get all at but my point is Gasol had a not so great team and still made them respectable whereas Love had a not so great team and they were a laughing stock so to me a comparison between those two is way off.

But I totally get the same player on a different team, different stats scenario. Thats why I take advanced stats with a grain of salt because there are so many other things to factor in that the stat sheet doesn't tell you....

completly agree,

smith&wesson
10-02-2011, 03:03 PM
the discussion between love and gasol is way too premature.

first off were talking about pau gasol the guy who lead spain to a gold medal. he is a proven player, an nba champion, a veteran.

love is a younge player very talented and skilled but has alot to prove in the league and he has alot of time to do so.

KnicksorBust
10-02-2011, 03:09 PM
Advanced statistics like win shares, offensive rating, and defensive rating all support Pau as a superior player.

Ebbs
10-02-2011, 03:43 PM
They are key to understanding everything happening on the court. They are not the be all end all and like Swash said there are no perfect stats. But they all have some value.

People who say "no watching the game is the best because you can see everything". Well sorry but that's utter BS.

1) you don't see everything on a tv broadcast. There will be slot of plays you miss someone doing something off camera or away from the ball. To truly understand the game you need the stats that can back up the claims yoyr making. The whole "Kobe is a great defender I've seen it" doesn't fly.

2) There are 30 teams in the NBA all playing 82 games no one on this site sees everyone. No one on this site sees even an 1/8th of those combined games. I find it unlikely most posters even see all 82 games of their own favorite team. So how a Houston fan is going to try and argue about Bobcats players when they maybe saw the bobcats play twice last year without stats is a joke.

ewmania
10-02-2011, 04:19 PM
its such great players in nba history whos done alot for they team if u look at they advanced stats they would seem like crap

so no

Greet
10-02-2011, 04:39 PM
Oh my god, a serious NFL thread? I'm so excited :D

In some response to the thread --

I find that the advanced defense stats are way too flawed. You can't rate a players defense using these stats - Especially if you want too go by Drtg. Most of the defense stats are team based.

Derrick Rose put up a 5 spot on DWS (4.8 really but w/e), which was better then his first two season combined. Did his defense really get that much better? No he got better, but not that much better. He got a new coach, and had the best defense in the NBA.

Advanced stats are going to make a bad player on a good team look A LOT better then a bad player on a bad team.

I guess if you're looking at the stats of a top flight player on a bad team, it's a bit more accurate. If I wanted to use Lebron for an example, he proved using advanced stats that he was a better player than Kobe Bryant, just by putting up the numbers he did on a terrible team like Cleveland.

the_jon
10-02-2011, 04:40 PM
^ When they argue they swear stats are everything
You're just talking to the wrong people then. Pretty much everyone in this thread in favor of advanced stats has said something to the effect of "they tell you a lot, but not everything".

Most (but not all) of the people in this thread against advanced stats have pretty much just said "no they don't" without giving any real insight as to why that might be.

Stats are definitely important but not everything. Nobody here is watching even a quarter of every single game in a season. That's why we need advanced stats. You can't build a team completely on stats, but neither can you build a team by simply watching everyone play. There just aren't enough hours on the clock to do that.

Baseball is different, you can build a team based on nothing but stats. Basketball is not that kind of game, but that doesn't make advanced stats superfluous like some people seem to be suggesting.

smith&wesson
10-02-2011, 05:03 PM
You're just talking to the wrong people then. Pretty much everyone in this thread in favor of advanced stats has said something to the effect of "they tell you a lot, but not everything".

Most (but not all) of the people in this thread against advanced stats have pretty much just said "no they don't" without giving any real insight as to why that might be.

Stats are definitely important but not everything. Nobody here is watching even a quarter of every single game in a season. That's why we need advanced stats. You can't build a team completely on stats, but neither can you build a team by simply watching everyone play. There just aren't enough hours on the clock to do that.

Baseball is different, you can build a team based on nothing but stats. Basketball is not that kind of game, but that doesn't make advanced stats superfluous like some people seem to be suggesting.

no body here is watching even a quarter of every single game in a season ? are you sure your on the right psd ? lots of ppl here watch as many games as they can.

likemystylez
10-02-2011, 05:11 PM
thats his point though. you take gasol and and put him on championship caliber lakers team and his stats are bound to drop while differing to kobe . u take that same player and put him on a team with scrubs and he stats become inflated... how does his stats tell you how good he is in this scenerio ? its based on your teams circumstance. gasol on the t.wolves would be the best player hands down. on the lakers he becomes the 2nd or 3rd best player and naturally he loses touches. is he a better player on a crap team ? no he just gets more touches, more playing time, he becomes more of a focal point where as on ship team he may have to differ to a kobe bryant or a lebron james etc.. same player two different circumstances.

somthing like bosh going from 24 & 12 on a crap toronto team to 18 & 8 on a contending heat team.

I didnt say that every player on a winning team is better than every player on a losing team. The top player on a winning team is likely going to be considered better than the top player on a losing team...especially when you have a guy who constantly puts up great individual numbers and yet constantly is on losing teams no matter where he goes.

Great players are difference makers in the wins and losses catagory.

Also when a great player on a winning team is getting his numbers in crunch time against the best possible defense... those numbers mean a lot more than a guy like kevin love... who played 30+ minutes of garbage time on any given night... where the game wasnt even in question for mopst of the final 3 quarters.

likemystylez
10-02-2011, 05:13 PM
Monta Ellis had similer numbers to kobe bryant last season, infact if he got half the calls that kobe bryant got... montas numbers would have been better than kobes in ppg and fg%... yet who do you think most would assume is the better player?

Would that be the case if kobe had spent his whole carreer on a team that was always in the lotto?

Knicks21
10-02-2011, 05:15 PM
If you understand basketball, you should be able to separate the good players from the average without stats.

Ebbs
10-02-2011, 05:27 PM
If you understand basketball, you should be able to separate the good players from the average without stats.

Umm yea but any ****** with 2 eyes can do that. I think most people on this site have a thirst for sports knowledge further than good from average.

Greet
10-02-2011, 05:56 PM
Monta Ellis had similer numbers to kobe bryant last season, infact if he got half the calls that kobe bryant got... montas numbers would have been better than kobes in ppg and fg%... yet who do you think most would assume is the better player?

Would that be the case if kobe had spent his whole carreer on a team that was always in the lotto?

PPG + FG% = Advanced stats

Wrong thread buddy

IndyRealist
10-02-2011, 06:45 PM
Advanced stats take out the emotional factor that can bias your opinion. In the example above, if you're a Lakers fan you're going to be predisposed to saying Kobe is better than Monta, or vice versa. If a coach pushed to select a certain player in the lottery, he's going to be predisposed to giving that player game time, even if his backup smokes him in practice.

Advanced stats aren't supposed to show you what you already see, it's supposed to show you what you don't. Three years ago people considered Carmelo Anthony a top 5 player. Advanced stats have gone a long way to separating out what his team was doing from what he was doing, and showed that he had a pretty good team around him despite that they weren't high volume scorers with big contracts. In fact his team carried him quite a bit. And argue all you want, the trade with NYK only served to reinforce exactly who got the better of that deal. Now try to find more than a handful of people that still considers Melo top tier talent.

And go watch Moneyball.

Swashcuff
10-02-2011, 07:04 PM
I didnt say that every player on a winning team is better than every player on a losing team. The top player on a winning team is likely going to be considered better than the top player on a losing team...especially when you have a guy who constantly puts up great individual numbers and yet constantly is on losing teams no matter where he goes.

Great players are difference makers in the wins and losses catagory.

Also when a great player on a winning team is getting his numbers in crunch time against the best possible defense... those numbers mean a lot more than a guy like kevin love... who played 30+ minutes of garbage time on any given night... where the game wasnt even in question for mopst of the final 3 quarters.

Would you consider prime Joe Dumars to be a great player? Also aided with the help of Isiah Thomas in the twilight of his career just 3 years removed from being the two time defending NBA champs?

How about a team consisting of Wilt Chamberlain (half the season), Nate Thurmond AND Guy Rodgers? Are they not great players?

How about Prime Buck Williams? There are those that say he's better than Amar'e Stoudemire. How about Bob McAdoo, Gail Goodrich, Dwyane Wade etc? Are any of these ment great players when they were in their prime?

You HAVE to understand that this is a team game and saying something like great players are difference makers in the W-L category without at least attempting to get a comprehensive understanding of not only the team but the league then you'd never gain a true appreciation for what happened.

This is a TEAM sport and though some may say players like Love and Blake put up #s because they are playing alongside scrubs don't even pay attention to the simple fact that the PF is the deepest position currently in the NBA. These players are going up against the best of the best and outplaying them damn near every time they face them. It's not like they're playing the way they are because their opponents are inferior.

Kevj77
10-02-2011, 07:40 PM
thats his point though. you take gasol and and put him on championship caliber lakers team and his stats are bound to drop while differing to kobe . u take that same player and put him on a team with scrubs and he stats become inflated... how does his stats tell you how good he is in this scenerio ? its based on your teams circumstance. gasol on the t.wolves would be the best player hands down. on the lakers he becomes the 2nd or 3rd best player and naturally he loses touches. is he a better player on a crap team ? no he just gets more touches, more playing time, he becomes more of a focal point where as on ship team he may have to differ to a kobe bryant or a lebron james etc.. same player two different circumstances.

somthing like bosh going from 24 & 12 on a crap toronto team to 18 & 8 on a contending heat team.Gasol is what he is on any team an 19 point, 9 rebound, 3 assist guy that shoots over 50%. His non-advanved stats are almost identical in his Memphis and LA years. His per and TS% are also almost identical so my question is why has his WS been so much better on a better team. Is it because he has a lower USG%, which improves his OWS? That would make sense. His DWS has been better in LA, but he isn't a very good defender he has averaged around 2 more rebounds per game, but I didn't think that would double his DWS. Is it because the Lakers have a better team defense than Memphis did?

Maybe some advance stats guys could help me understand how they are calculated a little better.

Raph12
10-02-2011, 08:06 PM
Advanced stats let you compare players using impact, production and efficiency; which is the most effective way of comparing individual ability IMHO... You have your guys who like to throw out "per game" stats and other guys who like to throw out "team success" as methods of comparison, those are far more significantly flawed comparison methods than "advanced stats". Not saying that "advanced stats" tell all, but a much more effective way to evaluate a player's abilities/presence.

KnicksorBust
10-02-2011, 08:36 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to quote Brent Barry.

bagwell368
10-02-2011, 08:41 PM
They are a good tool. Unless you are a junkie you might only see an average or meh team in the other Conference 1-2-3 times a year, it helps to have more data.

Recently I went to BR with a question. I noticed that Larry Bird had much higher DWS than McHale during a period of years when both were the main starters. But it's just wrong. McHale had to always take the tougher offensive player - small 3's to big 4's including a number of HOF players, Bird always got the weaker guy.

So my point was that if Bird had Caldwell Jones and Bobby Jones in a game and kept them to 13 points and McHale has Barkley and holds him to 17 points Bird looks better on paper - but those guys got their average off of Bird, but McHale kept Barkley 7 points under his average.

They said they had nothing in place to deal with that. So in a given year you miss 3 games against guys that are having classic games, catch 5 other great scorers when they have the flu or are on the back end of 3 day in 4 game stretch, and play average against the rest of the league and you'll look pretty damn good.

Also in earlier eras when there was less stat collection BR has laughable ways of figuring out OWS and DWS. Some of the Celtic players look amazing on DWS when they were not at all.

Hawkeye15
10-02-2011, 10:40 PM
I don't know if that one is exactly a fair comparison. Gasol never had an outstanding roster in Memphis and still managed to take them from a lottery team to a playoff team as the leader, albeit he did have excellent coaches.

I replied to a poster who said the only stat worth noting in a team sport is wins and losses. You can offer up whatever comparison you like, my point stands.

Hawkeye15
10-02-2011, 10:42 PM
its such great players in nba history whos done alot for they team if u look at they advanced stats they would seem like crap

so no

what are you talking about? The all time greats have awesome advanced stats.

D Roses Bulls
10-02-2011, 10:46 PM
stats tell a story some what. advance stats are just ugh...... Don't get me wrong, in a sport like baseball, they are VERY useful, but basketball, not really..... besides to guys like john hollinger who need to write to make a paycheck. This is one of the few good things that there isn't a basketball season this year because I don't have to hear the term "PER". I'm going to leave it at that though, most know how I feel about advance stats.

Hawkeye15
10-02-2011, 10:46 PM
Monta Ellis had similer numbers to kobe bryant last season, infact if he got half the calls that kobe bryant got... montas numbers would have been better than kobes in ppg and fg%... yet who do you think most would assume is the better player?

this statement alone tells me you don't understand advanced basketball stats. Hence why we don't agree in this thread.

Monta Ellis is the PERFECT example of why per game, archaic stats are useless. He is the PERFECT example of a player whose fans hate advanced stats.

You may have made a mistake on your comparison, I know you are better than that, but a better comparison would have been Melo versus Durant for example.

BigDiesel32
10-02-2011, 11:45 PM
Advanced statistcs are not useless but they do not tell the entire story like all stats. If you ask me I would much rather have someone argue what they saw in the game rather than using a bunch of advanced statistics or statistics in general. I see no point in posting in a forum if everyone already knows the answer because of the stats. There is more to the stats, always have been, always will be. Awards hold more weight than stats in my opinion.

Swashcuff
10-03-2011, 12:02 AM
Advanced statistcs are not useless but they do not tell the entire story like all stats. If you ask me I would much rather have someone argue what they saw in the game rather than using a bunch of advanced statistics or statistics in general. I see no point in posting in a forum if everyone already knows the answer because of the stats. There is more to the stats, always have been, always will be. Awards hold more weight than stats in my opinion.

So do you think having a scoring title makes you the best scorer in the league that season?

Or does making the All Defensive first team make you a better defensive player than the player who made the 2nd team at your position?

Quite honestly with advanced stats I really trust the awards even less.

djeller1139
10-03-2011, 12:04 AM
Stats are awesome.

BigDiesel32
10-03-2011, 12:06 AM
So do you think having a scoring title makes you the best scorer in the league that season?

Or does making the All Defensive first team make you a better defensive player than the player who made the 2nd team at your position?

Quite honestly with advanced stats I really trust the awards even less.
Why does it matter? You rely on other people on a different site to make an opinion for you because you aren't capable of making it yourself.

Most of the time, yes, the guy who won the scoring title is the best scorer in the NBA. Most of the time. Durant has been the best scorer in the league in the past two seasons and he has won the scoring title for the best two years.

Defensive teams are different because it is based on reputation.

Swashcuff
10-03-2011, 12:15 AM
Why does it matter? You rely on other people on a different site to make an opinion for you because you aren't capable of making it yourself.

Most of the time, yes, the guy who won the scoring title is the best scorer in the NBA. Most of the time. Durant has been the best scorer in the league in the past two seasons and he has won the scoring title for the best two years.

Defensive teams are different because it is based on reputation.

:laugh: Are you a formally banned poster? Because you came into these threads with an agenda against me for posting something which I was a part of (was not allowed to vote but still took part in the discussions). :laugh:

I made a rebuttal to a poster who did the very same just to show the difference in the cultures.

Most of the time doesn't do the trick ALL of the time the statistics would be more accurate in telling you who the best scorer was. However you'd still have to watch the game to give those statistics credibility.

How are defensive teams different? It's an award. Just like ALL NBA and MVP. Are they all different then? :confused:

Crackadalic
10-03-2011, 12:20 AM
Im not even a stats guy but I feel advance stats just provide further info on a player then what we see with our eyes. From what I see I feel melo is top 5-7. Based on the stats he's top 12.

Chronz
10-03-2011, 02:14 AM
The story advanced stats tell us is more informative than the story basic stats tell me. Thats all I want and care about

bagwell368
10-03-2011, 08:36 AM
Advanced statistcs are not useless but they do not tell the entire story like all stats. If you ask me I would much rather have someone argue what they saw in the game rather than using a bunch of advanced statistics or statistics in general. I see no point in posting in a forum if everyone already knows the answer because of the stats. There is more to the stats, always have been, always will be. Awards hold more weight than stats in my opinion.

Depends on who does the watching. IMO about 1/2 of the posters here in basketball appreciate individual offense, but when you start talking pick and roll, boxing out, filling the lane, defensive rotation, etc. they might get it when its pointed out to them, but they can't tease it out for themselves in the flow of the game. If you watch a game live if all you do is watch the ball, I'm talking about you.

Many awards are given out by writers with other sorts of blind spots - such as politics, timing, subjective biases, etc.

For instance a lot of writers went nuts on DA for the Perkins trade. Why? Because they were thinking of the 2007-2010 Perkins. Some of these guys didn't even see Perkins play for the Celts last year (12 games out of 55). Well since they didn't watch, and they didn't bother to look at the stats (which showed his decline due to injury well) all they went off is the past memories and opinions. Of course they were all defrocked by Perkins performance in the playoffs which was morbidly bad.

This sort of thing happens all the time.

So you need it all (understanding, observation, stats, time to ruminate).

ink
10-03-2011, 09:27 AM
The game is so much bigger than stats of any kind. Stats are a small fraction of the experience, or a little brother to the experience.

D Roses Bulls
10-04-2011, 02:58 AM
So do you think having a scoring title makes you the best scorer in the league that season?

Or does making the All Defensive first team make you a better defensive player than the player who made the 2nd team at your position?

Quite honestly with advanced stats I really trust the awards even less.

the second bolded I agree with you on, but the first one I dont know wtf you are talkin about. when mcgrady won the scoring title two years in a row, no doubt he was the best scorer in the NBA. I mean Iverson was a beast on the offensive side and so on. I mean I get what you are sayin to a certain extent, but overall, no........ unless you have a team like bryant had or a second option like jordan had or shaq with kobe, then there is no reason why you shouldn't win the scoring title.

Swashcuff
10-04-2011, 03:06 AM
the second bolded I agree with you on, but the first one I dont know wtf you are talkin about. when mcgrady won the scoring title two years in a row, no doubt he was the best scorer in the NBA. I mean Iverson was a beast on the offensive side and so on. I mean I get what you are sayin to a certain extent, but overall, no........ unless you have a team like bryant had or a second option like jordan had or shaq with kobe, then there is no reason why you shouldn't win the scoring title.

Allen Iverson wasn't a better scorer than Kobe Bryant but he has more scoring titles than Kobe has and this is coming from a huge Iverson fan boy. Winning the scoring title doesn't automatically mean you're the best scorer in the game it's circumstantial. Had LeBron not gone to Miami and remained with the Cavs he would have surely averaged over 27 ppg last season. Would we then say that LeBron is the best scorer in the game and not Kevin Durant because of it? Hell even Wade could have done better than 28 ppg. Would that mean that both LeBron and Wade are better scorers then and they aren't now?

It takes much more to gauge who's the best scorer in the game than just using the scoring titles. The scoring title just tells you who scored the greatest volume of points per game, by no means does it mean that that player is a better scorer than someone else because he scored more.

nickdymez
10-04-2011, 08:38 AM
of course they do. This is why we know that Lebron is better than Jordan

basketfan4life
10-05-2011, 02:24 AM
Allen Iverson wasn't a better scorer than Kobe Bryant but he has more scoring titles than Kobe has and this is coming from a huge Iverson fan boy. Winning the scoring title doesn't automatically mean you're the best scorer in the game it's circumstantial. Had LeBron not gone to Miami and remained with the Cavs he would have surely averaged over 27 ppg last season. Would we then say that LeBron is the best scorer in the game and not Kevin Durant because of it? Hell even Wade could have done better than 28 ppg. Would that mean that both LeBron and Wade are better scorers then and they aren't now?

Same logic applies with advanced stats to, but people never mention it?

and i'd be glad if people answere my points about advanced stats rather than saying yes or no.

Chronz
10-05-2011, 10:42 AM
of course they do. This is why we know that Lebron is better than Jordan
Explain yourself


Same logic applies with advanced stats to, but people never mention it?

and i'd be glad if people answere my points about advanced stats rather than saying yes or no.
I think they have, in a simplified way. Context matters in any analysis, thats your answer. That doesnt mean we toss away the only objective form of analysis/evidence we have, and it certainly doesnt mean we go back to the less accurate form of measurement.

Still Ill look at your OP and Ill answer the Q's you had that werent opinion based.

1) PER is based on per minute production while accounting for the effects of pace (some would say alittle too much), so it uses rebound rate for all intents and purposes.

2) Assists are subjective, but so was your opinion on how players accrue them, this is where some sort of analysis on Rondo's assist rate with or without certain players on the floor can come in handy.

3) Bron did play worse in the regular season, thats all the stats tell me. Could be due to his immense defensive responsibility, learning to play alongside new teammates and the big spotlight on his back, but its also likely that his decrease in athleticism played a role, he looks heavier than ever before, and if you compare his possession stats from one year to the next you can see his efficiency in the triple threat stance has suffered. He simply cant blow by his man from that attack stance anymore, its partly why hes so reliant on his midrange game now. Part of that was to make room for his teammates because Wade lacks the efficiency in his jumpshot so having them change roles could have hurt both of them, historically speaking when 2 slashers come together, one of them inevitably becomes more of a jumpshooter, since Bron has the better shot, and Wade can create his own on the fly, he focused on that distributing role.

Overall Im not convinced Bron is a better player now than the year before, hes definitely a better jumpshooter and carried a massive load defensively, and I agree his teammates will suppress his own individual brilliance to a degree but completely blaming his teammates for his decline in efficiency is just as wrong as basing a player purely on stats.

For one, whenever a player becomes more jumpshot oriented, your obviously going to lose some of your efficiency from the floor but the tradeoff is suppose to be that you become less turnover prone since those forays to the rim are replaced by less aggressive shots. This didnt happen with Bron, despite the fact that he was sharing ball handling duties with Wade. This makes me think he probably handled the ball just as much as he ever did in Cleveland, he just focused more on passing when he had it.

Which brings me to my 2nd point, Bron was very sloppy with his passing in the early going (part of this was due to him learning where his teammates like to catch the ball (An early game vs Philly stands out, Bron made a ridiculously great pass to Udonis but he was expecting a lob and Bron was expecting him to be grounded like his teammates in Cleveland), the end result was a turnover for Bron but it was the kind you can forgive because it was a result of growing pains. So in that sense I can overlook his turnover #'s but they better improve next year.

Which I believe they will since his #'s improved as the season went on. But there is no denying hes slower and refuses to take advantage of his added beef by dominating down low, so his lack of efficiency isnt just a result of his teammates its his own doing as well.


The rest of your post was your opinion and while I agree with some points, I cannot answer them because I do not share your view point.

69centers
10-05-2011, 03:47 PM
The internet alone has propelled advanced stats. No one in the real world I know talks or cares about advanced stats. From the 60 year old sports know it all, to the 18 year old sport fact genius, I don't know a single person in my daily life that's ever brought up advanced stats when discussing basketball. And I talk sports nearly every day outside of the internet, with probably 2-5 different people per day, and especially during basketball season.

It's only ever done in sports forums like this one. They are not the normal measuring sticks and will never, ever be. Not even close.

Chronz
10-05-2011, 04:52 PM
The internet alone has propelled advanced stats. No one in the real world I know talks or cares about advanced stats.
People on the internet ARE REAL. Deal with it, the advances in world wide communications have resulted in a massive exchange of information. People within the NBA are real and just because they dont talk to you doesnt make them less valid.


From the 60 year old sports know it all, to the 18 year old sport fact genius, I don't know a single person in my daily life that's ever brought up advanced stats when discussing basketball. And I talk sports nearly every day outside of the internet, with probably 2-5 different people per day, and especially during basketball season.


It's only ever done in sports forums like this one. They are not the normal measuring sticks and will never, ever be. Not even close.

Thats based on your isolated viewpoint, the internet provides a greater range of opinions from the populace at large, in short, nobody gives a **** about what you consider to be the normal measuring stick, Advanced stats have been accepted as superior forms of measurements to people who matter and therefore the fans who follow their lead. You dont have to put much worth into stats, but you do have to put more stock into the stats that actual statisticians care about. Per possession stats are what matter.

69centers
10-05-2011, 09:27 PM
People on the internet ARE REAL. Deal with it, the advances in world wide communications have resulted in a massive exchange of information. People within the NBA are real and just because they dont talk to you doesnt make them less valid.

Real in essence, but not entirely. Try putting one of your many advanced stats arguments into a human voiced conversation. It doesn't work. You can post on here to your hearts content; flip back and forth from Basketball Reference to the PSD page numerous times; and go on and on about TS% and WS. The problem is, it ONLY works on here. Not in real life. You'd never have a person want to stand and speak to you for 5 seconds if you rambled on like you do in these forums about percentages and worthless stats.


Thats based on your isolated viewpoint, the internet provides a greater range of opinions from the populace at large, in short, nobody gives a **** about what you consider to be the normal measuring stick, Advanced stats have been accepted as superior forms of measurements to people who matter and therefore the fans who follow their lead. You dont have to put much worth into stats, but you do have to put more stock into the stats that actual statisticians care about. Per possession stats are what matter.

Not an isolated viewpoint at all. If you think for one second that any part of the basketball community who cares about advanced stats is at a level that's anywhere in the double digit percentages, you're truly delusional.

valade16
10-05-2011, 09:43 PM
Real in essence, but not entirely. Try putting one of your many advanced stats arguments into a human voiced conversation. It doesn't work. You can post on here to your hearts content; flip back and forth from Basketball Reference to the PSD page numerous times; and go on and on about TS% and WS. The problem is, it ONLY works on here.


Not an isolated viewpoint at all. If you think for one second that any part of the basketball community who cares about advanced stats is at a level that's anywhere in the double digit percentages, you're truly delusional.

Your first point is pretty irrelevant and borderline stupid. That's like saying people who text aren't "real" because you communicate differently with them and real people. Of course it's going to be a different way of communicating!

Your second point is wrong. Most of the NBA employs statistician's who specialize in advanced stats...

What do Advanced stats show you that makes you think they are so wrong that you hate them this much?

69centers
10-05-2011, 10:53 PM
Your first point is pretty irrelevant and borderline stupid. That's like saying people who text aren't "real" because you communicate differently with them and real people. Of course it's going to be a different way of communicating!

Very bad comparison. Texts are shorter ways of making choppy sentences. People can speak in texts all day, just in longer, more cohesive forms. Posting in forums about advanced stats is flipping back and forth through pages of reference material, then voicing your argument on a forum page about your results. No one speaks like that or has the knowledge to stand there without using any reference or source, and be able to verbally talk about the game in that way like they do here.


Your second point is wrong. Most of the NBA employs statistician's who specialize in advanced stats...

Most of the employed NBA statisticians in no way shape or form make up more than 10% of basketball fans. My point is valid. In no way currently or ever will people who care about advanced stats make up even as much as 10% of anyone who cares about basketball.

840,000 people saw the Trailblazers play last year. 10% of that is 84,000 people. Do you honestly believe that at least 84,000 of those fans follow advanced statictics? :no:

There probably isn't even 84 NBA statisticians right now, never mind 84,000. OK, and that's just one team, and that's just fans who pay to see the game, never mind the millions more who view it on TV. You'd be damned lucky to find even 3% of basketball fans who care about advanced stats, let alone 10%.


What do Advanced stats show you that makes you think they are so wrong that you hate them this much?

They are flawed. Many reasons and examples that I've beaten to a pulp in various threads on here, but one main reason is when you take some of the career advanced stats you will find huge bulks of players at the top of the lists who are just mediocre role players. That just doesn't happen with sound stats, and everyone at the top of the RPG and PPG lists are superstars. Just look at the top 100 all time list for TS% and see how many no names are on the list. And you don't have guys like Terry Porter and Vlade Divac showing up on true stats top 100 lists like you can for WS.

Every single player on the top 100 of PPG career in the NBA is either a hall of famer or close to it. Nowhere near the case in the advanced stat categories.

Chronz
10-05-2011, 11:09 PM
Real in essence, but not entirely. Try putting one of your many advanced stats arguments into a human voiced conversation. It doesn't work.
Based on your experience, again I dont care for your sample of one. Quite frankly stats rarely come up whenever I discuss basketball with friends and associates in the real world but if they do happen to bring up #'s (Which is the point of this thread) I make sure to inform them of the only stats that matter.


You can post on here to your hearts content; flip back and forth from Basketball Reference to the PSD page numerous times; and go on and on about TS% and WS. The problem is, it ONLY works on here. Not in real life. You'd never have a person want to stand and speak to you for 5 seconds if you rambled on like you do in these forums about percentages and worthless stats.

Again, it doesnt matter what the guy who doesnt know jack about stats thinks about stats. If Im talkin stats Im obviously dealing with people who can keep up, not your average fan.


Not an isolated viewpoint at all. If you think for one second that any part of the basketball community who cares about advanced stats is at a level that's anywhere in the double digit percentages, you're truly delusional.

Ive seen too much evidence against your opinion in the form of the growth in importance of these #'s, more importantly the #'s are being adopted and utilized by people MUCH more important to the game than you or I, actual GM's, Coaches, Analysts, Players, and statisticians. Good luck convincing the REAL WORLD, that your viewpoint is more valid without a shred of evidence to support it.

I dont care what joe blow thinks, their arguments are easier to break down without stats, if they happen to mention #'s then they open themselves up to a thorough analytical breakdown.

Swashcuff
10-05-2011, 11:48 PM
Difference between people like 69centers and people like Chronz.

Chronz has a comprehensive understanding of the game in its entirety but doesn't need advanced metrics to formulate a reasonable and intellectual opinion about the game and its players. In order to give himself a solid basis on which to evaluate a player's/team's overall worth he incorporates the use of advanced metrics into his analysis. People like Chronz appreciate the analysis from people who know the game in its entirety and is well thought/learned in all aspects of basketball. These people are usually in the minority of fans of any sport.

People like 69centers on the other hand they just care about what people who don't know jack about jack think. He rather the opinion of a man on the street who watches no more than 20 games a season than a man who's job is the game of basketball.

You can have a street convo and not make the slightest mention of TS%, PER, WS etc because quite frankly a street convo really doesn't break down in such a manner but if street convos were all you care about then you'd never join a forum to discuss basketball in the first place. Here is where its broken down further and gives you a better appreciation for the game than a convo at the local barbershop with guys who mispronounce the names of half the European players.

If you ever wanna get away from the streets and have a discussion with the professionals you'd better do your homework on not just basic stats and accomplishments but also advanced stats.

To get away from all the advanced talk now and get to something basic. There is a simple viewpoint that is Quality is better than Quantity. People like Chronz value quality, 69centers quantity.

tredigs
10-05-2011, 11:57 PM
Very bad comparison. Texts are shorter ways of making choppy sentences. People can speak in texts all day, just in longer, more cohesive forms. Posting in forums about advanced stats is flipping back and forth through pages of reference material, then voicing your argument on a forum page about your results. No one speaks like that or has the knowledge to stand there without using any reference or source, and be able to verbally talk about the game in that way like they do here.



Most of the employed NBA statisticians in no way shape or form make up more than 10% of basketball fans. My point is valid. In no way currently or ever will people who care about advanced stats make up even as much as 10% of anyone who cares about basketball.

840,000 people saw the Trailblazers play last year. 10% of that is 84,000 people. Do you honestly believe that at least 84,000 of those fans follow advanced statictics? :no:

There probably isn't even 84 NBA statisticians right now, never mind 84,000. OK, and that's just one team, and that's just fans who pay to see the game, never mind the millions more who view it on TV. You'd be damned lucky to find even 3% of basketball fans who care about advanced stats, let alone 10%.



They are flawed. Many reasons and examples that I've beaten to a pulp in various threads on here, but one main reason is when you take some of the career advanced stats you will find huge bulks of players at the top of the lists who are just mediocre role players. That just doesn't happen with sound stats, and everyone at the top of the RPG and PPG lists are superstars. Just look at the top 100 all time list for TS% and see how many no names are on the list. And you don't have guys like Terry Porter and Vlade Divac showing up on true stats top 100 lists like you can for WS.

Every single player on the top 100 of PPG career in the NBA is either a hall of famer or close to it. Nowhere near the case in the advanced stat categories.

In essence, what I take from these viewpoints is/are, "I'd rather be a part of the masses".

You are the majority - there is no questioning that.

But you would do well to take into consideration that the people who are obsessive enough to delve deep into advanced stats are those that aren't quite satiated enough from the stats/video alone. The pioneers in that field have gone as far as they can go in that realm. Some use advanced numbers as a crutch - yes, but I'd still prefer reading that crutch than archaic per-game numbers (with no adjusting involved). Advanced stats at their core are all about trying to take players numbers into consideration after the playing field is adjusted. It's a work in progress (that's part of the fun...), but they can be the perfect compliment to actually watching the games. Per-game numbers simply don't adjust for different situations enough to do the same.

But again, you're right that very few bball fans can or would bother to understand a back and forth conversation about WinShare/48 or a guys TS%, but you'd have to be in denial not to realize that the number of statisticians on an owners payroll (and a teams bench) grow season by season. Can the masses understand them? No, and I think that's a testament to their effectiveness.

Do you think your standard run of the mill stock-buyer could comprehend high level conversations with Warren Buffet on optimal dividend yields and any other ancillary factors that they should take into consideration when trading? Probably not - and they're worse off for it. I say arm yourself with as much information as possible (the true key is just knowing what to filter through and what to toss out the window).

hugepatsfan
10-05-2011, 11:59 PM
Advanced stats are not everything. They need to be put into context. They should never be the be all end all argument. But they are far more reliable than what our eyes tell us and are a great tool in evaluating players/teams. The only way to truly understand a player's worth would be to watch every second of every game and look at every stat so you can put it all into context, subjectively and objectively. Now obviously that isn't realistic for any fan or even a GM to do. The stats are a great substitute to help try and catch those nuances that you missed because you couldn;t watch every minute detail of every game.

Hawkeye15
10-06-2011, 12:50 AM
Real in essence, but not entirely. Try putting one of your many advanced stats arguments into a human voiced conversation. It doesn't work. You can post on here to your hearts content; flip back and forth from Basketball Reference to the PSD page numerous times; and go on and on about TS% and WS. The problem is, it ONLY works on here. Not in real life. You'd never have a person want to stand and speak to you for 5 seconds if you rambled on like you do in these forums about percentages and worthless stats.



Why did you come here? To talk to people who get more in depth than the guy at work at the water cooler, right?

Fact is, REAL sports fans who like to take an in depth view into their sports, has information that will indeed bore the normal co-worker.

We are here to talk sports, in depth. Of course none of us would open up a can of statistics on a co-worker. What the hell point are you proving? That is why we are on PSD, otherwise you would be talking about the Brewers game with your classmate tomorrow without knowing what a double play is...

knightstemplar
10-06-2011, 01:08 AM
PER just doesnt make sense to me
take a look at this, these are Kobe's 2008 to 2009 playoff numbers

2008 PO - 30.1 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5.6 APG, 1.7 SPG, 0.4 BPG, .479 FG%, .577 TS%, .514 eFG%, PER: 25.0
2009 PO - 30.2 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 5.5 APG, 1.7 SPG, 0.9 BPG, .457 FG%, .564 TS%, .492 eFG%, PER: 26.8

How is that 1.8 PER better?

lakers4sho
10-06-2011, 01:10 AM
Only an idiot would say that advanced metrics are the end-all be-all.

knightstemplar: look at the equation for PER, and you'll get your answer.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 01:12 AM
PER just doesnt make sense to me
take a look at this, these are Kobe's 2008 to 2009 playoff numbers

2008 PO - 30.1 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5.6 APG, 1.7 SPG, 0.4 BPG, .479 FG%, .577 TS%, .514 eFG%, PER: 25.0
2009 PO - 30.2 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 5.5 APG, 1.7 SPG, 0.9 BPG, .457 FG%, .564 TS%, .492 eFG%, PER: 26.8

How is that 1.8 PER better?

Turnover rate

knightstemplar
10-06-2011, 01:20 AM
Turnover rate

3.3 to 2.6
is big enough to make a -1.8 difference?, 08 had more rebounds, assists, and better efficiency

whitemamba33
10-06-2011, 01:26 AM
Meh.

They are just like any other stat. Sometimes they are useful, sometimes they aren't. They'll give you a general picture, but there are FAR too many exceptions for me to consistently rely on them.

Any stat (offensive rating) that puts Gene Banks ahead of Michael Jordan is going to be hard for me to completely buy in to. But stats without proper interpretation and contest is and will always be meaningless.

knightstemplar
10-06-2011, 01:26 AM
Only an idiot would say that advanced metrics are the end-all be-all.

knightstemplar: look at the equation for PER, and you'll get your answer.

can you give me a link to the formula, cause this is what Ive found

You Are Here > Basketball-Reference.com > About > Calculating PER
Quantcast
Calculating PER

The Player Efficiency Rating (PER) is a per-minute rating developed by ESPN.com columnist John Hollinger. In John's words, "The PER sums up all a player's positive accomplishments, subtracts the negative accomplishments, and returns a per-minute rating of a player's performance." It appears from his books that John's database only goes back to the 1988-89 season. I decided to expand on John's work and calculate PER for all players since minutes played were first recorded (1951-52).

All calculations begin with what I am calling unadjusted PER (uPER). The formula is:

uPER = (1 / MP) *
[ 3P
+ (2/3) * AST
+ (2 - factor * (team_AST / team_FG)) * FG
+ (FT *0.5 * (1 + (1 - (team_AST / team_FG)) + (2/3) * (team_AST / team_FG)))
- VOP * TOV
- VOP * DRB% * (FGA - FG)
- VOP * 0.44 * (0.44 + (0.56 * DRB%)) * (FTA - FT)
+ VOP * (1 - DRB%) * (TRB - ORB)
+ VOP * DRB% * ORB
+ VOP * STL
+ VOP * DRB% * BLK
- PF * ((lg_FT / lg_PF) - 0.44 * (lg_FTA / lg_PF) * VOP) ]

Most of the terms in the formula above should be clear, but let me define the less obvious ones:

factor = (2 / 3) - (0.5 * (lg_AST / lg_FG)) / (2 * (lg_FG / lg_FT))
VOP = lg_PTS / (lg_FGA - lg_ORB + lg_TOV + 0.44 * lg_FTA)
DRB% = (lg_TRB - lg_ORB) / lg_TRB

I am not going to go into details about what each component of the PER is measuring; that's why John writes and sells books.

Problems arise for seasons prior to 1979-80:

* 1979-80 — debut of 3-point shot in NBA
* 1977-78 — player turnovers first recorded in NBA
* 1973-74 — player offensive rebounds, steals, and blocked shots first recorded in NBA

The calcuation of uPER obviously depends on these statistics, so here are my solutions for years when the data are missing:

* Zero out three-point field goals, turnovers, blocked shots, and steals.
* Set the league value of possession (VOP) equal to 1.
* Set the defensive rebound percentage (DRB%) equal to 0.7.
* Set player offensive rebounds (ORB) equal to 0.3 * TRB.

Some of these solutions may not be elegant, but I think they are reasonable. After uPER is calculated, an adjustment must be made for the team's pace. The pace adjustment is:

pace adjustment = lg_Pace / team_Pace

League and team pace factors cannot be computed for seasons prior to 1973-74, so I estimate the above using:

estimated pace adjustment = 2 * lg_PPG / (team_PPG + opp_PPG)

To give you an idea of the accuracy of these estimates, here are the actual pace adjustments and the estimated pace adjustments for teams from the Eastern Conference in 2002-03:

Tm Act Est

ATL 1.00 0.99
BOS 1.00 1.02
CHI 0.97 0.98
CLE 0.97 0.99
DET 1.05 1.06
IND 0.99 1.00
MIA 1.04 1.08
MIL 1.01 0.96
NJN 0.99 1.03
NOH 1.01 1.02
NYK 1.00 0.98
ORL 0.98 0.97
PHI 1.00 0.99
TOR 1.01 1.01
WAS 1.03 1.03

For all seasons where actual pace adjustments can be computed, the root mean square error of the estimates is 0.01967.

Now the pace adjustment is made to uPER (I will call this aPER):

aPER = (pace adjustment) * uPER

The final step is to standardize aPER. First, calculate league average aPER (lg_aPER) using player minutes played as the weights. Then, do the following:

PER = aPER * (15 / lg_aPER)

The step above sets the league average to 15 for all seasons.

Those are the gory details. If you have any comments or questions, please send me some feedback.



can someone simplify that

MTar786
10-06-2011, 02:33 AM
stats are facts.. seeing is believing

if wade had a migraine and went 2 for his first 8 shots had 2 turovers.. got fouled and refs chose not to call them which resulted in 'missed shots' on the next 3. went 6-9 from the line. miami was down by 16 entering the 4th quarter. wade ends up going 8 of 10. getting the last possesion block on the defensive end followed by the game winner the stat line would read wade

wade 28 points on 10-22 shooting 5assists 2-5 from the 3 pointline 3 rebounds 3 to's 0 steals 1 block 6-9 from the line.

stats would tell you this.. but they wont tell you about his migraine, or how he was practically god in the 4th querter and then made the defensive play of the game and hit the game winning buzzer beater... stats also wont tell you that lebron was out for the game and wade just beat the LA lakers in game 1 of the NBA finals while KOBE was guarding him and wade put the team on his shoulders when he wasnt fit enough to play to begin with. STATS wont tell you wade just had an all time hero-game


we are humans.. not computers
being human is better
i rest my case

bagwell368
10-06-2011, 06:41 AM
For instance 69centers argued these points on the Celts board:

PP > McHale (we can already see that the PSD poll disagrees with him, so did the Celts poll). Now of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, but the arguments were so long and drawn out and didn't seem to show insight into McHale and his career. Well... go read it for yourselves and draw your own opinion.

That he doesn't care about the Celts (or any) owner making money, and doesn't even believe they should have a profit motive that exceeds the desire to put a great team on the court. That the Celts owners should sell the team because they have a profit motive. Yet claims he doesn't care about such details or motivations, and just wants the games played. Well that is OK, but then don't turn around and complain about mechanisms you do not understand in the next breath, and then label fans that DO understand negatively because they do not agree with your opinion.

Chronz is a top tier poster on this board, that is excellent with both historical and current observations and wielding stats.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 09:20 AM
stats are facts.. seeing is believing

if wade had a migraine and went 2 for his first 8 shots had 2 turovers.. got fouled and refs chose not to call them which resulted in 'missed shots' on the next 3. went 6-9 from the line. miami was down by 16 entering the 4th quarter. wade ends up going 8 of 10. getting the last possesion block on the defensive end followed by the game winner the stat line would read wade

wade 28 points on 10-22 shooting 5assists 2-5 from the 3 pointline 3 rebounds 3 to's 0 steals 1 block 6-9 from the line.

stats would tell you this.. but they wont tell you about his migraine, or how he was practically god in the 4th querter and then made the defensive play of the game and hit the game winning buzzer beater... stats also wont tell you that lebron was out for the game and wade just beat the LA lakers in game 1 of the NBA finals while KOBE was guarding him and wade put the team on his shoulders when he wasnt fit enough to play to begin with. STATS wont tell you wade just had an all time hero-game


we are humans.. not computers
being human is better
i rest my case

Great post. I completely agree.

Tell me something however. Who's hotter? Meagan Fox or Jessica Alba? Which car's exterior looks better 2011 Jaguar XKR or the 2011 Lexus LFA? Who's a better actor Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp?

Problem is your opinion on this may vary does it make you more right than someone who doesn't agree? Your eyes are biased. Some people tend to be less willing to critique the player/team in which they are rooting for while criticizing every aspect of an opposing player's game paying attention to the weaknesses and not the strengths or even vice versa. As a 76ers fan I saw that last season where fellow fans blamed Iggy for being a bad shooter, stunting Evan Turner's growth etc and completely ignored the fact that because of Iggy's D our team were not completely blown out in more games than one.

Stats for the most part are not. Are there instances where they are YES. But they are all based on factual outputs.

I think LeBron is a better perimeter defender than Kobe Bryant but my buddy completely disagree with me and its something we argue about every time we meet. He thinks all LeBron does is chase down players and attempt to get blocks from behind and as a result LeBron has amazingly become good defensively. What makes him right and me wrong? He watches 70+ Laker games a season and only watches LeBron in the ASG and playoff time and maybe a regular season game here or there.

What makes one semi biased fan's observation better than mine? This is why when I seek advice from someone who knows the game of basketball I seek advice from someone who has known the game for a long time and actually have a complete understanding with as little bias/agenda as possible.

As for your question all I'll say what will really make you appreciate Dwyane's migraine game is when you put that amazing performance into prospective by comparing it to games in which he play when completely healthy.

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 11:04 AM
people on this forum who know and use advanced stats are the smart people. People on this forum who discount advanced stats are the people who don't understand them, i.e. the stupid people.

That's all there is to it.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 11:58 AM
Anybody trying to discuss basketball should know to use a combination of simple statistics, advanced statistics, the "eyeball" test and context to judge a player's value. Statistically, Wilt Chamberlain is one of the most impressive players in the history of the NBA. Whether you judge him by points, rebounds, PER, WS/48, etc. the dude was a dominant player. What they don't tell you is that Bill Russell and the Celtics regularly dominated Wilt in the postseason.

Statistics don't show you Willis Reed limping into Madison Square Garden in Game 7 of the 1970 Finals or that Jordan had the flu when he put up 38 in Game 5 of the 97 Finals. Advanced stats CAN give you a very good idea of how a player performed in the postseason vs. the regular season, but they might not measure Hondo or Bird's steals or Miller's 8 points in 9 seconds. You have to be able to use a combination of the two.

As far as the OP's belief that they don't measure how much a player dominates the ball, I disagree to an extent. I think a combination of usage rate, TS%, assist rate and turnover rate can give us an idea of how much of a ball hog a guy was. Take Allen Iverson for example... His career usage (31.8) is the third highest in the history of the league behind Jordan and Wade, but his TS% (.518) is atrocious to say the least (Jordan - .569, Wade - .567) and his ORtg is extremely low (105) for a player who scored as many points as he did (Jordan - 118, Wade - 111).

And you could have used the eyeball test to determine that Iverson was not a great player in the playoffs and had such little postseason success, but advanced stats back that up and then some... His .489 career playoff TS% is god awful and his .109 WS/48 is extremely mediocre for a player of his caliber.

If anything, I think advanced stats do a good job to enhance what we're watching on television. You can watch Lebron James or Kobe Bryant and know they are great players, but you can't watch every single game they both play in, and you can't always determine a player's impact on the game just by watching it on television or going off of what you read.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 12:25 PM
There are like 5 guys on this site that will kill for advanced stats. While the rest of the world doesn't care at all..

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 12:25 PM
stats are facts.. seeing is believing

if wade had a migraine and went 2 for his first 8 shots had 2 turovers.. got fouled and refs chose not to call them which resulted in 'missed shots' on the next 3. went 6-9 from the line. miami was down by 16 entering the 4th quarter. wade ends up going 8 of 10. getting the last possesion block on the defensive end followed by the game winner the stat line would read wade

wade 28 points on 10-22 shooting 5assists 2-5 from the 3 pointline 3 rebounds 3 to's 0 steals 1 block 6-9 from the line.

stats would tell you this.. but they wont tell you about his migraine, or how he was practically god in the 4th querter and then made the defensive play of the game and hit the game winning buzzer beater... stats also wont tell you that lebron was out for the game and wade just beat the LA lakers in game 1 of the NBA finals while KOBE was guarding him and wade put the team on his shoulders when he wasnt fit enough to play to begin with. STATS wont tell you wade just had an all time hero-game


we are humans.. not computers
being human is better
i rest my case

This is a great post

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 12:36 PM
There are like 5 guys on this site that will kill for advanced stats. While the rest of the world doesn't care at all..

and those 5 guys can hold intelligent debate with one another while the rest of you people are stuck to your subjective opinions and have arguments like "Yeah huh", "nuh uh", "you suck", "no you suck". :rolleyes:

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 12:38 PM
and those 5 guys can hold intelligent debate with one another while the rest of you people are stuck to your subjective opinions and have arguments like "Yeah huh", "nuh uh", "you suck", "no you suck". :rolleyes:

Holding an intelligent debate about advanced stats on PSD isnt really that big of a deal is it?

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 12:46 PM
just holding an intelligent debate on PSD seems like a big deal...

The problem with you anti-stats people is that your arguments are crippled, you're at a loss as soon as somebody asks you to prove your assertions.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 12:49 PM
stats are facts.. seeing is believing

if wade had a migraine and went 2 for his first 8 shots had 2 turovers.. got fouled and refs chose not to call them which resulted in 'missed shots' on the next 3. went 6-9 from the line. miami was down by 16 entering the 4th quarter. wade ends up going 8 of 10. getting the last possesion block on the defensive end followed by the game winner the stat line would read wade

wade 28 points on 10-22 shooting 5assists 2-5 from the 3 pointline 3 rebounds 3 to's 0 steals 1 block 6-9 from the line.

stats would tell you this.. but they wont tell you about his migraine, or how he was practically god in the 4th querter and then made the defensive play of the game and hit the game winning buzzer beater... stats also wont tell you that lebron was out for the game and wade just beat the LA lakers in game 1 of the NBA finals while KOBE was guarding him and wade put the team on his shoulders when he wasnt fit enough to play to begin with. STATS wont tell you wade just had an all time hero-game


we are humans.. not computers
being human is better
i rest my case

Advanced stats won't tell you that if you just look at the entire game, but if you were to only look at the 4th quarter, they would. And anyone who can read an Associated Press article or look at a box score and read a play-by-play can determine how good a game he had. But in your example, if he had played better in the first three quarters, would they have been down by 16 in the first place?That statline you just gave us shows that Wade AT LEAST had a very good game in the NBA Finals, which is a start. Adding in context of Lebron missing the game, the migraines and the 4th quarter dominance makes it that much greater.

But that is the essence of sports and statistics. If we watch a playoff game and we see a player hit a big shot at the end of the game, we know about the big shot and it's importance and we know he helped the team win the game. But did you catch every turnover he had prior to that moment? The poor shots he took? All the free throws he missed? If a player goes 1-10 and scores three points in an NBA Finals Game 7, but hits the game-winning three, most of us will only remember the three. Selective memory.

Statistics help remind us that big moments, postseason success and intangibles are not everything. Robert Horry won seven championships and hit some extremely big shots in his postseason career. Tracy McGrady never played a second round playoff game. If you were starting a team right now and you had a choice between the two, who do you take?

MTar786
10-06-2011, 12:59 PM
just holding an intelligent debate on PSD seems like a big deal...

The problem with you anti-stats people is that your arguments are crippled, you're at a loss as soon as somebody asks you to prove your assertions.

and when advaced stats fan boys try to use their advanced stats to prove their point they dont realize how dumb anti-stats guys think you guys are.

because their vision is not computer based.. yet human based.. are you a computer or a human? you are human and what matters is the HUMAN perspective. you can argue your side.. but it all ends up nowhere. the beauty about sports is that everyone can have their opinion without needing proof to back it up.. the proof is in the pudding when you watch these guys play. the fact of the matter is your stat crap will tell you lebron is a better defender than kobe.. but in reality.. kobe may be the better defender on monday and lebron on tuesday. kobe has a better midrange shot.. but stats will tell you lebron does. but then if you ask 99.9% of the nba they will tell you THROUGH EXPERIENCE that they respect kobes jumper a hell of a lot more

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:04 PM
Advanced stats won't tell you that if you just look at the entire game, but if you were to only look at the 4th quarter, they would. And anyone who can read an Associated Press article or look at a box score and read a play-by-play can determine how good a game he had. But in your example, if he had played better in the first three quarters, would they have been down by 16 in the first place?That statline you just gave us shows that Wade AT LEAST had a very good game in the NBA Finals, which is a start. Adding in context of Lebron missing the game, the migraines and the 4th quarter dominance makes it that much greater.

But that is the essence of sports and statistics. If we watch a playoff game and we see a player hit a big shot at the end of the game, we know about the big shot and it's importance and we know he helped the team win the game. But did you catch every turnover he had prior to that moment? The poor shots he took? All the free throws he missed? If a player goes 1-10 and scores three points in an NBA Finals Game 7, but hits the game-winning three, most of us will only remember the three. Selective memory.

Statistics help remind us that big moments, postseason success and intangibles are not everything. Robert Horry won seven championships and hit some extremely big shots in his postseason career. Tracy McGrady never played a second round playoff game. If you were starting a team right now and you had a choice between the two, who do you take?

you never know. maybe they would have been down by 18.. or up by 5. this is basketball.. theres a thing called momentum.

secondly about the horry tmac thing.. thats a terrible example.

we dont needs a stat line there.
history will tell you the answer to that.
if you're looking for the perfect role player.. i take horry.
if you're looking for a star take tmac.
HISTORY tells you rob was clutch,successful and a winner.
History tells you tmac was great.. but he was injury prone.
stats will tell u tmac played bad in 08.. history will tell u tmac had the worst back problems in 08.

stats will tell you kobe only averaged 24ppg in 04
history will tell you that no, kobe was not on the decline.. he was just sharing the ball with 3 other stars and that he had a rape case distracting him.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 01:07 PM
and when advaced stats fan boys try to use their advanced stats to prove their point they dont realize how dumb anti-stats guys think you guys are.

because their vision is not computer based.. yet human based.. are you a computer or a human? you are human and what matters is the HUMAN perspective. you can argue your side.. but it all ends up nowhere. the beauty about sports is that everyone can have their opinion without needing proof to back it up.. the proof is in the pudding when you watch these guys play. the fact of the matter is your stat crap will tell you lebron is a better defender than kobe.. but in reality.. kobe may be the better defender on monday and lebron on tuesday. kobe has a better midrange shot.. but stats will tell you lebron does. but then if you ask 99.9% of the nba they will tell you THROUGH EXPERIENCE that they respect kobes jumper a hell of a lot more

When people ask you about Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Havlicek, Bird and Magic, do you tell them what you know from experience? No. You were not alive. You use statistics, youtube videos, articles and blogs to make your points. If you use statistics to judge players you weren't alive to watch, why can't you use them to judge players you watch today?

And since when did this turn into a Kobe vs. Lebron debate? Can't we all just agree that we'd rather have Lebron for the first 46 minutes of a game and Kobe for the last two?

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 01:09 PM
and when advaced stats fan boys try to use their advanced stats to prove their point they dont realize how dumb anti-stats guys think you guys are.

because their vision is not computer based.. yet human based.. are you a computer or a human? you are human and what matters is the HUMAN perspective. you can argue your side.. but it all ends up nowhere. the beauty about sports is that everyone can have their opinion without needing proof to back it up.. the proof is in the pudding when you watch these guys play. the fact of the matter is your stat crap will tell you lebron is a better defender than kobe.. but in reality.. kobe may be the better defender on monday and lebron on tuesday. kobe has a better midrange shot.. but stats will tell you lebron does. but then if you ask 99.9% of the nba they will tell you THROUGH EXPERIENCE that they respect kobes jumper a hell of a lot more

Uh huh...humans came up with this system that allows for some objective standard of truth. That system is called stats.

What if you got into a debate with a wolves homer who told you that michael beasley is better than kobe? What would you do then besides berating him, makng fun of him and using ad hominem attacks? How could you prove him wrong? You couldnt. Your way allowe for everyone to have their opinion without any way to measure that opinin against any objective standard of truth.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 01:09 PM
you never know. maybe they would have been down by 18.. or up by 5. this is basketball.. theres a thing called momentum.

secondly about the horry tmac thing.. thats a terrible example.

we dont needs a stat line there.
history will tell you the answer to that.
if you're looking for the perfect role player.. i take horry.
if you're looking for a star take tmac.
HISTORY tells you rob was clutch,successful and a winner.
History tells you tmac was great.. but he was injury prone.
stats will tell u tmac played bad in 07.. history will tell u tmac had the worst back problems in 07.
Way to completely dodge the entire point of my post and attack the random examples. You've really got this whole debating thing down... :facepalm:

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:11 PM
When people ask you about Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Havlicek, Bird and Magic, do you tell them what you know from experience? No. You were not alive. You use statistics, youtube videos, articles and blogs to make your points. If you use statistics to judge players you weren't alive to watch, why can't you use them to judge players you watch today?

And since when did this turn into a Kobe vs. Lebron debate? Can't we all just agree that we'd rather have Lebron for the first 46 minutes of a game and Kobe for the last two?

the fact that you are baiting just makes me wonder if you even deserve a reply. but whatever. i did get to see magic and bird play. but i dont share an opinion about the other because i didnt see them. and the fact that you would use ur advabced stats to have an opinion about wilt or bill russel just proves ur stupidty

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:15 PM
Way to completely dodge the entire point of my post and attack the random examples. You've really got this whole debating thing down... :facepalm:

im only replying to your examples because i dont care to debate with you.
my opinion is my opinion.. and clearly many people agreed with my post. no need ot entertain an argument that you post that doesnt make sense to me

u seem very frustrated btw.. do you live to argue with people on PSD?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:17 PM
the fact that you are baiting just makes me wonder if you even deserve a reply. but whatever. i did get to see magic and bird play. but i dont share an opinion about the other because i didnt see them. and the fact that you would use ur advabced stats to have an opinion about wilt or bill russel just proves ur stupidty

Your first post in this thread was solid. Since then however you've dropped that standard.

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 01:18 PM
Take away everybody on this forum who values opinions over facts and keep only those 5 people who know a lot about stats, and this forum would be a much better place. Thats my opinion.

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:20 PM
Uh huh...humans came up with this system that allows for some objective standard of truth. That system is called stats.

What if you got into a debate with a wolves homer who told you that michael beasley is better than kobe? What would you do then besides berating him, makng fun of him and using ad hominem attacks? How could you prove him wrong? You couldnt. Your way allowe for everyone to have their opinion without any way to measure that opinin against any objective standard of truth.

when you find smebody that will tell me beasley is better than kobe and truly believe it then i will reply to this lol

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:21 PM
im only replying to your examples because i dont care to debate with you.
my opinion is my opinion.. and clearly many people agreed with my post. no need ot entertain an argument that you post that doesnt make sense to me

u seem very frustrated btw.. do you live to argue with people on PSD?

That right there is the classic statement by every single poster who don't have it in them to actually accept the growth of the game or at least take an opportunity to understand the facts or what exactly they tell us.

It's a shame that you guys stick to this ignorant stance about its your opinion. Word of advice no one cares about your opinion if you can't back it with any kind of factual substance.

The example you gave earlier was hypothetical we agreed because its true but we don't agree with anything you've said since then. You've clearly shown your inability to have an intellectual debate not only here but anywhere.

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 01:22 PM
A month ago I had a wolves fan tell me Beasley was better than J.R. Smith.

If I had your philosophy, there's no way I could prove him wrong, because your philosophy seemingly doesn't allow for proof of any sort. It's all opinion and every bodies opinion is as good as anybody elses opinion, and there is no truth in such a philosophy. To you, 'truth' is whatever anybody thinks at any moment.

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:23 PM
Your first post in this thread was solid. Since then however you've dropped that standard.

what was the point of calling me out

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:26 PM
That right there is the classic statement by every single poster who don't have it in them to actually accept the growth of the game or at least take an opportunity to understand the facts or what exactly they tell us.

It's a shame that you guys stick to this ignorant stance about its your opinion. Word of advice no one cares about your opinion if you can't back it with any kind of factual substance.

The example you gave earlier was hypothetical we agreed because its true but we don't agree with anything you've said since then. You've clearly shown your inability to have an intellectual debate not only here but anywhere.

an you clearly show that you thrive on arguments to go upon your day.
why do you want to turn everything into a debate? avanced stats guys either have no life.. or love arguments.

MTar786
10-06-2011, 01:28 PM
theres a reason advanced stat-wh***s are not the majority. there are MANY dieard bball fans.. and most of them are not advanced stat guys. thats all i have left to say.. because it is near impossible to have a decent convo with an advanced stat nerd

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 01:30 PM
You're just resorting to insults now when your view is challenged. You aren't making the anti-stats people look good. What we've learned about you is that you don't believe in objective truth and you don't believe in or are incapable of carrying on a civil argument or debate.

The reason you don't want a debate is because you can't debate, and you'd lose. Except you're too stubborn to admit when you've lost, anyway.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:30 PM
an you clearly show that you thrive on arguments to go upon your day.
why do you want to turn everything into a debate? avanced stats guys either have no life.. or love arguments.

Yea you showed some common sense earlier but now you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 01:33 PM
stats will tell you kobe only averaged 24ppg in 04
history will tell you that no, kobe was not on the decline.. he was just sharing the ball with 3 other stars and that he had a rape case distracting him.

Those are simplistic stats. Looking at advanced stats, you can see that Kobe's usage rate went down 3.8 points and his TS% went up a little bit, so maybe Kobe was picking his shots better and deferring more. A poorer assist %, rebound %, steal % and block % shows me that he wasn't as active on both ends of the floor, but an improved turnover % shows he was making less mistakes. Overall, his PER took a bit of a hit that season, but his WS/48 stayed the same, probably as the result of the lower TO%. Fewer games and minutes showed that he either on the decline, dealing with injuries or some outside factors.

You can determine a lot from advanced statistics beyond making assumptions like "fewer points means he's getting worse."

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:35 PM
Would you rather be an NBA player or one of the millions who aspire to be?

Hell would you be an NBA Superstar or the hundreds of other players who want to be?

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 01:37 PM
Yea you showed some common sense earlier but now you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with.

....I spotted a bunch of logical fallacies in his last 2 posts alone. A lot of people on this forum would benefit greatly from a logic class or two. And I don't say that to be smug, I just say that as a fact.

Rentzias
10-06-2011, 01:38 PM
an you clearly show that you thrive on arguments to go upon your day.
why do you want to turn everything into a debate? avanced stats guys either have no life.. or love arguments.
Because this thread says "Are Advanced Stats Telling the Story?"

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 01:42 PM
Yea you showed some common sense earlier but now you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with.

i used to like you as a poster, but you are repeatedly calling people "ignorant", "biased", "you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with", i know you won't care but actually you are loosing credit in my eyes because whenever someone doesn't agree with you, you call them out ...lately you've started to seem extremely ignorant to me.

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 01:44 PM
It's not that he doesn't agree with him, it's that MTar has shown a lack of ability to be logical. Swash is completely right, you can't debate with someone who doesn't have a good grasp of logic.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 01:44 PM
the fact that you are baiting just makes me wonder if you even deserve a reply. but whatever. i did get to see magic and bird play. but i dont share an opinion about the other because i didnt see them. and the fact that you would use ur advabced stats to have an opinion about wilt or bill russel just proves ur stupidty
I'm the stupid one, but you're the one with piss-poor grammar. If you honestly say you can't have an opinion on players because you didn't see them in person, then I think that's a really stupid way to view sports. We can (and should) all have opinions, even if you're not a huge stats guy. For instance, I can compare Kobe to Lebron and say Lebron has been better statistically but Kobe has the postseason success, therefore Kobe has had the better career. You can use that same analogy for Wilt/Russell.

If you're just going to ignore all athletes who came before you because you didn't see them in person and never make any kind of judgment on the history of the league prior to your own existence, then you're a lame fan and a lame poster.



im only replying to your examples because i dont care to debate with you.
my opinion is my opinion.. and clearly many people agreed with my post. no need ot entertain an argument that you post that doesnt make sense to me

u seem very frustrated btw.. do you live to argue with people on PSD?
I'm hardly frustrated. In fact, I find your arguments pretty horrific, and you have such little evidence to back up anything you say. You just keep saying that people who disagree with you are "baiting" and say that you're entitled to your opinion and that advanced stats are lame.

Nobody here is saying that advanced stats, alone, are the only judge of a player's worth. PER and WS/48 are nice tools, but they don't measure everything. They don't take injuries into account or clutch play and they aren't particularly good measures of defensive abilities. But to entirely ignore carefully constructed formulas developed by people who are extremely knowledgeable about the sport in favor of your own eyes is just plain ignorance.

If your computer broke and you have seen the inside of a computer before but had no real experience repairing computers, would you try to fix it yourself or would you seek the advice of someone who knows what they are doing?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:50 PM
i used to like you as a poster, but you are repeatedly calling people "ignorant", "biased", "you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with", i know you won't care but actually you are loosing credit in my eyes because whenever someone doesn't agree with you, you call them out ...lately you've started to seem extremely ignorant to me.

If you use to like my posts then that would mean you can read with some logic. Hear what then read what that poster said when others replied to him and tell me if it makes any sense attempting to have a discussion with him.

Also if you join a forum to share your opinions and understand the opinions of other and you're not willing to attempt to understand their POV but rather stick to the stance that's its your opinion you're right and they are wrong won't you say you're being ignorant? What makes your opinion better than someone else's?

You're saying I'm calling people out. Aren't these the very same people who call us geeks, freaks, etc. These people don't even understand what is being debated but start calling names because we view the sport holistically and they don't. Some reason however you see no reason when they call us out but when its the other way around and I'm stating what's only obvious you see an issue there. Interesting.

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 01:50 PM
It's not that he doesn't agree with him, it's that MTar has shown a lack of ability to be logical. Swash is completely right, you can't debate with someone who doesn't have a good grasp of logic.
look at his last three posts to mTAR,


Your first post in this thread was solid. Since then however you've dropped that standard.

mtrar said to another poster my poinion is my opinion between these two posts and all of a sudden he is ignorant and,he's clearly shown your inability to have an intellectual debate not only here but anywhere.

That right there is the classic statement by every single poster who don't have it in them to actually accept the growth of the game or at least take an opportunity to understand the facts or what exactly they tell us.

It's a shame that you guys stick to this ignorant stance about its your opinion. Word of advice no one cares about your opinion if you can't back it with any kind of factual substance.

The example you gave earlier was hypothetical we agreed because its true but we don't agree with anything you've said since then. You've clearly shown your inability to have an intellectual debate not only here but anywhere.

here mtar finally gets mad and;

Yea you showed some common sense earlier but now you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with.

now you tell me he is not acting like lebron james of the internet.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:55 PM
look at his last three posts to mTAR,







now you tell me he is not acting like lebron james of the internet.

This is why I like advanced stats. They give us a more complete POV than basic or by just watching the game.

Tell me is it not "biased" to show what I said and ignore what he did? Tell me why should we "ignore" what the other guy says and pay attention to what the other guy is saying?

You can't have a conversation with yourself this is a two way process.

But hey lets ignore what the other guy says and focus only on what was said by me. That really gives us an understanding of the conversation.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 01:58 PM
Did mtar not say mightybosstone proved his stupidity because he used advanced stats to aid his opinion on greats whom he never saw play live. But for some how because basketfan4life agrees with him he sees nothing wrong with that. Is that not clear bias?

I'm wrong for saying someone is biased but he isn't wrong fro saying someone is stupid. Different strokes for different folks. :pity:

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 02:01 PM
If you use to like my posts then that would mean you can read with some logic. Hear what then read what that poster said when others replied to him and tell me if it makes any sense attempting to have a discussion with him.

Also if you join a forum to share your opinions and understand the opinions of other and you're not willing to attempt to understand their POV but rather stick to the stance that's its your opinion you're right and they are wrong won't you say you're being ignorant? What makes your opinion better than someone else's?

You're saying I'm calling people out. Aren't these the very same people who call us geeks, freaks, etc. These people don't even understand what is being debated but start calling names because we view the sport holistically and they don't. Some reason however you see no reason when they call us out but when its the other way around and I'm stating what's only obvious you see an issue there. Interesting.
it's not interesting because i didn't care what kind of a poster the other guy is and i liked you as a poster, and when you act this way it's of course an issue because i valued your posts and how you react to people better...and i expect better.

also, he got a facepalm for no reason and than you attacked him first actually for vey little reason,while he wasn't even responding to you.

Rentzias
10-06-2011, 02:02 PM
My advanced stats say this is what happened, basketfan4life:


the fact that you are baiting just makes me wonder if you even deserve a reply. but whatever. i did get to see magic and bird play. but i dont share an opinion about the other because i didnt see them. and the fact that you would use ur advabced stats to have an opinion about wilt or bill russel just proves ur stupidty

Your first post in this thread was solid. Since then however you've dropped that standard.

im only replying to your examples because i dont care to debate with you.
my opinion is my opinion.. and clearly many people agreed with my post. no need ot entertain an argument that you post that doesnt make sense to me

u seem very frustrated btw.. do you live to argue with people on PSD?

That right there is the classic statement by every single poster who don't have it in them to actually accept the growth of the game or at least take an opportunity to understand the facts or what exactly they tell us.

It's a shame that you guys stick to this ignorant stance about its your opinion. Word of advice no one cares about your opinion if you can't back it with any kind of factual substance.

The example you gave earlier was hypothetical we agreed because its true but we don't agree with anything you've said since then. You've clearly shown your inability to have an intellectual debate not only here but anywhere.

an you clearly show that you thrive on arguments to go upon your day.
why do you want to turn everything into a debate? avanced stats guys either have no life.. or love arguments.

theres a reason advanced stat-wh***s are not the majority. there are MANY dieard bball fans.. and most of them are not advanced stat guys. thats all i have left to say.. because it is near impossible to have a decent convo with an advanced stat nerd

Yea you showed some common sense earlier but now you've just proven that its a total and complete waste of time to even attempt to have a logical discussion with.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 02:04 PM
it's not interesting because i didn't care what kind of a poster the other guy is and i liked you as a poster, and when you act this way it's of course an issue because i valued your posts and how you react to people better...and i expect better.

also, he got a facepalm for no reason and than you attacked him first actually for vey little reason,while he wasn't even responding to you.

Attacked him? I did no such thing I was only pointing out the simple fact that he was unable to stay consistent with solid posts.

Do you think saying someone is showing their stupidity is a good way hold a debate? I stated what anyone with a pair of eyes could notice.

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 02:07 PM
Attacked him? I did no such thing I was only pointing out the simple fact that he was unable to stay consistent with solid posts.

Do you think saying someone is showing their stupidity is a good way hold a debate? I stated what anyone with a pair of eyes could notice.

come on now, you said he can't have an intellegent conversation nut here but anywhere, debating with him is a waste of time...if this is not attacking i don't know what is...

because my pair of eyes can't notice what you said.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 02:10 PM
come on now, you said he can't have an intellegent conversation nut here but anywhere, debating with him is a waste of time...if this is not attacking i don't know what is...

because my pair of eyes can't notice what you said.

How is that attacking him? :confused:

Read his posts. Tell me if you can have a logical discussion with someone who comes in attacks people and leave because he thinks that those who don't hold his POV are not diehard fans.

I'm done with this though. If you want to talk about this PM me. As for the thread let's get back to the topic at hand.

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 02:12 PM
My advanced stats say this is what happened, basketfan4life:

some of that you quoted by mtar,wasn't even a responce to swashcuffs, he didn't even respond to him since his second post...

i'm saying this for the last time...i don't even remember who mtar is, so he doesn't have a value as a poster to begin with,(no attack, i just dont know you), it makes me sad real good posters acting this way...

Rentzias
10-06-2011, 02:13 PM
This IS a sports forum, so what is posted should be open to critique and debate, I don't see what the bunched panties are all about.

Treat it as a courtroom scenario where the loser of the argument goes to jail, and the remainder of PSD is the judge. Would you make your argument without facts and advanced statistics? Would you feel comfortable that your argument only has advanced statistics that can be devalued by anecdotal evidence and a showing of context?

Advanced statistics are easily available to you, as are videos and transcripts of interviews. I don't see why people shy away from using the available information to make an educated, non-halfassed argument in a sports forum. I mean, we all probably could be doing something better but went ahead and clicked into this forum right?

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 02:22 PM
This IS a sports forum, so what is posted should be open to critique and debate, I don't see what the bunched panties are all about.

Treat it as a courtroom scenario where the loser of the argument goes to jail, and the remainder of PSD is the judge. Would you make your argument without facts and advanced statistics? Would you feel comfortable that your argument only has advanced statistics that can be devalued by anecdotal evidence and a showing of context?

Advanced statistics are easily available to you, as are videos and transcripts of interviews. I don't see why people shy away from using the available information to make an educated, non-halfassed argument in a sports forum. I mean, we all probably could be doing something better but went ahead and clicked into this forum right?

well, if you read my opening post, i actually wanted to learn better about advanced stats...but only Chroz gave me an answer to what i'm asking...

Lastly to me, advanced stats seperates players to an extent, but looking at them and saying lebron is the best player in the league for 3-4 years is not logical, i'm not going into kobe lebron trough 2006-2010 thing because people automathically assume i talk this way because i'm a fan of Kobe, but at this point of their carreers i think d-wade is better than bron.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 02:28 PM
3.3 to 2.6
is big enough to make a -1.8 difference?, 08 had more rebounds, assists, and better efficiency

Well you said it yourself, that -1.8 difference is more than .5 difference in rebounds and assists, as for his efficiency both Kobes had identical usage rates, 2008 Kobe had a better TS% but once you account for those turnovers 2009 Kobe was actually more efficient.

I remember when Kobe said he actually felt like a better player that 2nd run to the Finals and the #'s support his opinion.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 02:30 PM
Meh.

They are just like any other stat. Sometimes they are useful, sometimes they aren't. They'll give you a general picture, but there are FAR too many exceptions for me to consistently rely on them.

Any stat (offensive rating) that puts Gene Banks ahead of Michael Jordan is going to be hard for me to completely buy in to. But stats without proper interpretation and contest is and will always be meaningless.
Thats because your not using the stat the way it suppose to be used. Offensive Rating isnt putting Gene Banks ahead of MJ any more than simple FG% ranks him ahead of MJ.

Just think of it that way, would you trash FG% for saying Gene Banks is better than MJ?

Rentzias
10-06-2011, 02:32 PM
well, if you read my opening post, i actually wanted to learn better about advanced stats...but only Chroz gave me an answer to what i'm asking...

Lastly to me, advanced stats seperates players to an extent, but looking at them and saying lebron is the best player in the league for 3-4 years is not logical, i'm not going into kobe lebron trough 2006-2010 thing because people automathically assume i talk this way because i'm a fan of Kobe, but at this point of their carreers i think d-wade is better than bron.
It was more of a general POV to those who want to disregard advanced stats in an argument.

At some point, the argument here focused solely on advanced stats' usage as the base evidence for someone's opinion. But look at your comment above re: points in careers. You have to put in advanced stat work in order to compare that type of stuff. You can't only rely on Youtube and articles to say Wade is better than Bron at this point in their careers. You have subjective and objective material available, and either is weak and can be manipulated without the other.

I'm not even close to having any sort of grasp of advanced stats, but since I've been reading posts on this forum where they are used, and introduced it to my buddies, we've all had a lot of "Oohh, I did not know that" type of moments where we reversed or verified our points of view.

Again, it's take a ton of pages, but it comes back to the point made in the first few pages that advanced stats tell a part of, not the whole story, and you don't want to leave story parts out.

basketfan4life
10-06-2011, 02:40 PM
It was more of a general POV to those who want to disregard advanced stats in an argument.
But look at your comment above re: points in careers. You have to put in advanced stat work in order to compare that type of stuff. You can't only rely on Youtube and articles to say Wade is better than Bron at this point in their careers. You have subjective and objective material available, and either is weak and can be manipulated without the other.


that is actually my point there,with an advanced stats based opinion,they are nearly equal players with bron being the better one, but i don't think that is the case with these two and there are whole a lot of things that must be in consideration and when i think about them i think wade is better...

it's good, but it's not exact science.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 02:41 PM
the fact that you are baiting just makes me wonder if you even deserve a reply. but whatever. i did get to see magic and bird play. but i dont share an opinion about the other because i didnt see them. and the fact that you would use ur advabced stats to have an opinion about wilt or bill russel just proves ur stupidty
If your going to go out of your way to berate the intelligence of people who question your stance, the LEAST you could do is show some form of intelligence by actually spelling the insult correctly.


There are like 5 guys on this site that will kill for advanced stats. While the rest of the world doesn't care at all..
Thank god your version of " the rest of the world" doesnt include people within the game of basketball itself. Otherwise I would care

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 02:58 PM
just holding an intelligent debate on PSD seems like a big deal...

The problem with you anti-stats people is that your arguments are crippled, you're at a loss as soon as somebody asks you to prove your assertions.

So Mtars post about the Dwayne Wade situation is crippled?

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:01 PM
If your going to go out of your way to berate the intelligence of people who question your stance, the LEAST you could do is show some form of intelligence by actually spelling the insult correctly.


Thank god your version of " the rest of the world" doesnt include people within the game of basketball itself. Otherwise I would care

Your so jaded is hilarious. Keep believing that people outside of psd care about Advanced Stats.. I'll tell you what, find me a situation where a sports writer said he voted for a player for an all star game, rookie of the year, or MVP using Advanced stats.

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:04 PM
Your so jaded is hilarious. Keep believing that people outside of psd care about Advanced Stats.. I'll tell you what, find me a situation where a sports writer said he voted for a player for an all star game, rookie of the year, or MVP using Advanced stats.

:laugh:

Advanced statistics are rapidly taking over the basketball world. If you actually believe that only PSD is buying into the new statistical method, then you must really not follow the game.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:06 PM
:laugh:

Advanced statistics are rapidly taking over the basketball world. If you actually believe that only PSD is buying into the new statistical method, then you must really not follow the game.

Dont just say it, prove it to me. I dont want to rely on your opinion.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:09 PM
To clarify, i believe that Advanced stats are out there, i just dont believe they are relevant. Until someone proves otherwise, ie, hearing about them somewhere other than PSD, im going to continue my lack of respect for them

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:12 PM
Dont just say it, prove it to me. I dont want to rely on your opinion.

Dean Oliver, one of the most respected innovators and creators of advanced basketball statistics, has served for the Seattle Sonics and is currently working as a scout (could be wrong about his specific job with the franchise, help me out Chronz) for the Denver Nuggets.

So with that said, are you naive enough to believe he's the only statistician using advanced statistics in the entire league?

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:12 PM
Your so jaded is hilarious. Keep believing that people outside of psd care about Advanced Stats.. I'll tell you what, find me a situation where a sports writer said he voted for a player for an all star game, rookie of the year, or MVP using Advanced stats.
I can name you an actual basketball player who uses advance stats to help him defend, I can name an actual GM who uses #'s to aid him in Roster decisions, I can name a coach who cites them, projects the #'s of his players and where they should get their offense. Believe me when I say this, the NBA does not **** around when it comes to getting a leg up on the comp. The statistical revolution has gone a long way in that.

And yes there are analyst who get to vote who use stats to make informed decisions. These are people outside of PSD and in the NBA. More importantly, the statisticians the NBA hires are the guys pushing the field forward. Ill take their opinion on the movement over yours. I will concede the it will probably never go over 100%, quite frankly I hope it doesnt but your post was wholeheartedly wrong. People in the real world care, you just dont know about them because your not a part of the NBA and you dont care to follow the movement.

Now what can you provide?

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:13 PM
Dont just say it, prove it to me. I dont want to rely on your opinion.

So long as all you can offer is opinion, you have no right to ask for more from anyone.

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:14 PM
List of teams using advanced statistics for scouting and research:

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,44/func,view/term,NBA%20Teams%20That%20Have%20Analytics%20Depar tment/

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:16 PM
I can name you an actual basketball player who uses advance stats to help him defend, I can name an actual GM who uses #'s to aid him in Roster decisions, I can name a coach who cites them. And yes there are analyst who get to vote who use stats to make inform decisions. These are people outside of PSD and in the NBA. More importantly, the statisticians the NBA hires are the guys pushing the field forward. Ill take their opinion on the movement over yours. I will concede the it will probably never go over 100%, quite frankly I hope it doesnt but your post was wholeheartedly wrong.

What can you provide?

What can i provide as far as what? Your telling me that you can name people. I dont get why i should believe that you can name people. I want to see proof. Show me where these people are praising the use of advanced stats. Im sure i can find you countless articles and blogs from writers who explain their votes and it will have nothing to do with advanced stats

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:18 PM
What can i provide as far as what? Your telling me that you can name people. I dont get why i should believe that you can name people. I want to see proof. Show me where these people are praising the use of advanced stats. Im sure i can find you countless articles and blogs from writers who explain their votes and it will have nothing to do with advanced stats

Shane Battier uses advanced statistics to properly defend his opposition. He's openly stated this.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:18 PM
Dean Oliver, one of the most respected innovators and creators of advanced basketball statistics, has served for the Seattle Sonics and is currently working as a scout (could be wrong about his specific job with the franchise, help me out Chronz) for the Denver Nuggets.

So with that said, are you naive enough to believe he's the only statistician using advanced statistics in the entire league?

Dean Oliver left the Nuggets to join ESPN, Dean Oliver was the guy behind the Ty Lawson/Afflalo deal, moves he based heavily on their Off.RTG in certain play sets.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:19 PM
List of teams using advanced statistics for scouting and research:

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,44/func,view/term,NBA%20Teams%20That%20Have%20Analytics%20Depar tment/

This tells me nothing. It just says "list of teams using advanced stats". But what stats are they using? What do you consider advanced stats? Im being serious not trying to bait. It doesn't exactly what type of stats they are using. When i think of advanced stats, im thinking of "PER, WS, TS, etc".

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:20 PM
Shane Battier uses advanced statistics to properly defend his opposition. He's openly stated this.

lmao.. WHERE!!

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:21 PM
What can i provide as far as what? Your telling me that you can name people. I dont get why i should believe that you can name people. I want to see proof. Show me where these people are praising the use of advanced stats. Im sure i can find you countless articles and blogs from writers who explain their votes and it will have nothing to do with advanced stats
As far as proof. Im telling you what I can prove if I feel inclined. Right now, in the face of such a weak protest, I dont feel inclined to do more than lift a finger. If you think Im lying then good for you, its better to ignore arguments you cant win anyways. You would think me posting for 3 years straight would be enough for people to take your word for it but I can prove everything Ive ever said.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:21 PM
Anyway, you guys are giving me a lot of hearsay and legendary stories.. I'll come back when there are some facts behind this...

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:24 PM
As far as proof. Im telling you what I can prove if I feel inclined. Right now, in the face of such a weak protest, I dont feel inclined to do more than lift a finger. If you think Im lying then good for you, its better to ignore arguments you cant win anyways. You would think me posting for 3 years straight would be enough for people to take your word for it but I can prove everything Ive ever said.

Two things sir.

1. I havent been here for 3 years
2. Im not gonna go back and recall all of your posts to get an idea of how credible you are.

Im not saying your lying about anything, im saying you've fell into the hype.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:25 PM
lmao.. WHERE!!

Several publications, but most recently in the book, "The Art of a Beautiful Game", Ive also heard interviews from Morey when Battier was with Houston about how he would be so open to absorbing as much data as possible.

Cerebral players like Battier who lack elite athletic ability NEED/CRAVE as much information as possible. But hey, he probably doesnt count as being part of the REAL WORLD amirite?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:25 PM
List of teams using advanced statistics for scouting and research:

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,44/func,view/term,NBA%20Teams%20That%20Have%20Analytics%20Depar tment/

Was about to post it but when it comes to dealing with that poster their is NO WAY we're going to do anything to have him think differently.

I believe the number of teams has since gone up however. It's up to 22.

22 out of 30 organizations use advanced stats. I wonder what those who like to be in the majority have to say about this?

I know what they'll say it doesn't mean anything since it isn't 30. :pity:

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:27 PM
This tells me nothing. It just says "list of teams using advanced stats". But what stats are they using? What do you consider advanced stats? Im being serious not trying to bait. It doesn't exactly what type of stats they are using. When i think of advanced stats, im thinking of "PER, WS, TS, etc".

Why doesn't it tell you anything? Because of the fact that you refuse to learn.

There is this nifty little thing called google. Google the names of the statisticians and you'd get all the answers to what you're saying. Also these statisticians aren't just using PER, TS and WS they are also using more metrics.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:28 PM
Two things sir.

1. I havent been here for 3 years
2. Im not gonna go back and recall all of your posts to get an idea of how credible you are.

Im not saying your lying about anything, im saying you've fell into the hype.
OK then, carry on .

You can live in your world, we can live in ours.


Shane Battier uses advanced statistics to properly defend his opposition. He's openly stated this.

Have you read Chris Ballards book?

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:31 PM
OK then, carry on .

You can live in your world, we can live in ours.



Have you read Chris Ballards book?

No, I'm not a big reader unfortunately. You recommend it?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:31 PM
Anyway, you guys are giving me a lot of hearsay and legendary stories.. I'll come back when there are some facts behind this...

All everyone has given you is facts you have done/said nothing to contradict what anyone has proven. They gave you facts however your opinion doesn't allow you to ascertain the difference between facts and opinion. That's why you think that the only people who use advanced stats are geeks but fact is they are even accepted by the players and coaches themselves.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:32 PM
Uh oh, its passive aggressive time from the "respected PSD posters".. I proved my point, no one proved anything to me. Someone said i should google something i care nothing about, but he cant google to show me what i need to see. Would rather me take his word for it. Someone suggest i read a book. No one can find anything in mainstream media about advanced stats.. MAINSTREAM MEDIA. Haven't seen it yet. So thanks guys, you won again.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:33 PM
All everyone has given you is facts you have done/said nothing to contradict what anyone has proven. They gave you facts however your opinion doesn't allow you to ascertain the difference between facts and opinion. That's why you think that the only people who use advanced stats are geeks but fact is they are even accepted by the players and coaches themselves.

Its not a fact because you say so. Link please.. And being accepted is one thing, but respected is another.. Like i said, i am aware of advanced stats. But i dont take them into consideration at all...

Rentzias
10-06-2011, 03:36 PM
To clarify, i believe that Advanced stats are out there, i just dont believe they are relevant. Until someone proves otherwise, ie, hearing about them somewhere other than PSD, im going to continue my lack of respect for them

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html?pagewanted=all

"Before the Rockets traded for Battier, the front-office analysts obviously studied his value. They knew all sorts of details about his efficiency and his ability to reduce the efficiency of his opponents." (The text after indicates they used game film to go deeper into the story, but it shows they had a base of efficiency stats that they used)

"Before the game, Battier was given his special package of information. “He’s the only player we give it to,” Morey says. “We can give him this fire hose of data and let him sift. Most players are like golfers. You don’t want them swinging while they’re thinking.” The data essentially broke down the floor into many discrete zones and calculated the odds of Bryant making shots from different places on the court, under different degrees of defensive pressure, in different relationships to other players — how well he scored off screens, off pick-and-rolls, off catch-and-shoots and so on. Battier learns a lot from studying the data on the superstars he is usually assigned to guard. For instance, the numbers show him that Allen Iverson is one of the most efficient scorers in the N.B.A. when he goes to his right; when he goes to his left he kills his team. The Golden State Warriors forward Stephen Jackson is an even stranger case. “Steve Jackson,” Battier says, “is statistically better going to his right, but he loves to go to his left — and goes to his left almost twice as often.” The San Antonio Spurs’ Manu Ginóbili is a statistical freak: he has no imbalance whatsoever in his game — there is no one way to play him that is better than another. He is equally efficient both off the dribble and off the pass, going left and right and from any spot on the floor."

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:36 PM
Uh oh, its passive aggressive time from the "respected PSD posters".. I proved my point, no one proved anything to me. Someone said i should google something i care nothing about, but he cant google to show me what i need to see. Would rather me take his word for it. Someone suggest i read a book. No one can find anything in mainstream media about advanced stats.. MAINSTREAM MEDIA. Haven't seen it yet. So thanks guys, you won again.

I don't know if I've ever come across such a close-minded individual. So just because you haven't read the books/articles/evidence, it doesn't exist?

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:37 PM
No, I'm not a big reader unfortunately. You recommend it?
Yea its not heavy reading at all and its covers a diverse range of aspects within the game. Its been so long since Ive read it that I might be overrating it but it has its moments. The defensive section is about Battier and he talks about his trade, he comments on how appreciative he was to play with Artest and compares and contrasts his intensity to Tmacs apathetic switches. You find little gems like that.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:37 PM
Uh oh, its passive aggressive time from the "respected PSD posters".. I proved my point, no one proved anything to me. Someone said i should google something i care nothing about, but he cant google to show me what i need to see. Would rather me take his word for it. Someone suggest i read a book. No one can find anything in mainstream media about advanced stats.. MAINSTREAM MEDIA. Haven't seen it yet. So thanks guys, you won again.

You want us to do everything for you? You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

You asked them questions they gave you answers but no matter what they said you don't care to hear anything they have to say because you have an agenda and are unwilling to accept the simple fact that the game is evolving and advanced stats have a huge role to play in that.

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:41 PM
Yea its not heavy reading at all and its covers a diverse range of aspects within the game. Its been so long since Ive read it that I might be overrating it but it has its moments. The defensive section is about Battier and he talks about his trade, he comments on how appreciative he was to play with Artest and compares and contrasts his intensity to Tmacs apathetic switches. You find little gems like that.

Hmm... Maybe I'll check it out. I've been wanting to read a profound basketball book, but I just haven't brought myself to do it yet. But, first I gotta finish ****ing Uncle Tom's Cabin for my American History class.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:43 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html?pagewanted=all

"Before the Rockets traded for Battier, the front-office analysts obviously studied his value. They knew all sorts of details about his efficiency and his ability to reduce the efficiency of his opponents." (The text after indicates they used game film to go deeper into the story, but it shows they had a base of efficiency stats that they used)

"Before the game, Battier was given his special package of information. “He’s the only player we give it to,” Morey says. “We can give him this fire hose of data and let him sift. Most players are like golfers. You don’t want them swinging while they’re thinking.” The data essentially broke down the floor into many discrete zones and calculated the odds of Bryant making shots from different places on the court, under different degrees of defensive pressure, in different relationships to other players — how well he scored off screens, off pick-and-rolls, off catch-and-shoots and so on. Battier learns a lot from studying the data on the superstars he is usually assigned to guard. For instance, the numbers show him that Allen Iverson is one of the most efficient scorers in the N.B.A. when he goes to his right; when he goes to his left he kills his team. The Golden State Warriors forward Stephen Jackson is an even stranger case. “Steve Jackson,” Battier says, “is statistically better going to his right, but he loves to go to his left — and goes to his left almost twice as often.” The San Antonio Spurs’ Manu Ginóbili is a statistical freak: he has no imbalance whatsoever in his game — there is no one way to play him that is better than another. He is equally efficient both off the dribble and off the pass, going left and right and from any spot on the floor."

This is a good post. Seems more like he's watching film of players and going off tendencies rather than looking at a bunch of thrown together numbers. Only he's not watching film. I can kind of give you this. But still its one player. I think most players do things like this when they watch film. If this is what you guys mean by advanced stats, then i stand corrected.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:43 PM
This conversation has run its course, we should stick with the topic at hand. Neither Dymez nor any of us will be able to agree on this issue. Let him live in his world and we'll live in the one where facts like NBA people using APEBEAR STATS hold more weight than joe nobody's opinion.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:45 PM
You want us to do everything for you? You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

You asked them questions they gave you answers but no matter what they said you don't care to hear anything they have to say because you have an agenda and are unwilling to accept the simple fact that the game is evolving and advanced stats have a huge role to play in that.

No, i just wanted you to site a source. Saying that "Chronz is a respected poster that knows what he's talking about" isn't going to cut it..

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:46 PM
This conversation has run its course, we should stick with the topic at hand. Neither Dymez nor any of us will be able to agree on this issue. Let him live in his world and we'll live in the one where facts like NBA people using APEBEAR STATS hold more weight than joe nobody's opinion.

lol@ my world. My world is earth. whats yours?

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:46 PM
This is a good post. Seems more like he's watching film of players and going off tendencies rather than looking at a bunch of thrown together numbers. Only he's not watching film. I can kind of give you this. But still its one player. I think most players do things like this when they watch film. If this is what you guys mean by advanced stats, then i stand corrected.
You combine the data together with film, thats what the pros do. What the article is describing is the data sheet Battier studies before every game on his counterpart. It has the per possession efficiency of a scorer from different zones on the floor, and different play sets.

It is for all intents and purposes a bunch of #'s that he studies.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:47 PM
Its not a fact because you say so. Link please.. And being accepted is one thing, but respected is another.. Like i said, i am aware of advanced stats. But i dont take them into consideration at all...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/30227/carlisle-pushed-all-of-the-right-buttons


Roland Beech launched 82games.com website in 2002/03 season and has contributed his analysis to ESPN.com and SI.com.

He has been working for Dallas Mavericks as Director of Basketball Analytics since October 2009. He is the first quantitative analyst to join a coaching staff. He sits on the bench during the game, travels with the team and participates in practices. Rick Carlyle and Roland Beech have brought a new concept called "Stats Coach".

Charles Klask of the Detroit Pistons also recently joined the Pistons Coaching Staff as their "Statistics Coach" and such is the same with Ryan Saunders and the Washington Wizards coaching staff.

This is something that we're going to see rapidly changing over the next couple years with every team adapting a position of advanced statistical analysis of players and teams.

Like it or not its real and its happening players and coaches are using advanced stats as a means of improving their game.

Given the fact that the Mavs were the innovators of such a strategy and came away with a title last season and the team in which have statisticians on staff came away with a better winning % than those that didn't its only inevitable that we'll see advanced stats become common with the common NBA fan and not just the most learned ones.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:47 PM
lol@ my world. My world is earth. whats yours?
Live in your earth and we will live in ours. What more do you need to say?

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:48 PM
No, i just wanted you to site a source. Saying that "Chronz is a respected poster that knows what he's talking about" isn't going to cut it..

I posted a link, in which you responded "this tells me nothing". Don't ask for links if you're going to write them off because you were caught off guard.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:48 PM
Live in your earth and we will live in ours. What more do you need to say?

Your being childish man. Takes away from your credibility honestly.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 03:48 PM
No, i just wanted you to site a source. Saying that "Chronz is a respected poster that knows what he's talking about" isn't going to cut it..

In other words, you want people to do the heavy lifting for you without you providing any form of evidence to support your viewpoint.

Does that seem fair to you?

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:49 PM
I posted a link, in which you responded "this tells me nothing". Don't ask for links if you're going to write them off because you were caught off guard.

Someone else posted a link with actual relevant information.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:50 PM
In other words, you want people to do the heavy lifting for you without you providing any form of evidence to support your viewpoint.

Does that seem fair to you?

He think he's right and everyone else is wrong which is why he doesn't need to do anything. It's OK for him to see his opinion as fact but when we give him facts all we're stating is opinion. Comical isn't it. :pity:

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:51 PM
In other words, you want people to do the heavy lifting for you without you providing any form of evidence to support your viewpoint.

Does that seem fair to you?

lol.. Using google isn't heavy lifting. Your trying to prove a point to me. Prove the point. Im sure you went to college. I'm sure you never turned a paper in without siting a source. You cant tell your professor to google the information if he/she doesn't agree with it

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:52 PM
He think he's right and everyone else is wrong which is why he doesn't need to do anything. It's OK for him to see his opinion as fact but when we give him facts all we're stating is opinion. Comical isn't it. :pity:

The fact that you people get so upset when someone doesn't agree with the relevance of advance stats makes your arguments even weaker.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:52 PM
Someone else posted a link with actual relevant information.

That link had ALL the relevant information you need. However I'm guessing you didn't take the time to read analyze and assess what was on the link. You opened it and closed it right back.

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:52 PM
Someone else posted a link with actual relevant information.

Hmm... So how exactly was my link irrelevant?

You asked for proof that advanced statistical analysis was being used by professionals. I provided a link giving you exactly what you asked for. Again, how is that irrelevant?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:53 PM
The fact that you people get so upset when someone doesn't agree with the relevance of advance stats makes your arguments even weaker.

We gave you facts, links, articles, quotes etc what have you given us? Also reply to my post to you about the Stats coach.

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:53 PM
lol.. Using google isn't heavy lifting. Your trying to prove a point to me. Prove the point. Im sure you went to college. I'm sure you never turned a paper in without siting a source. You cant tell your professor to google the information if he/she doesn't agree with it

Sorry, I forgot that we're all supposed to cater to you.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:54 PM
Hmm... So how exactly was my link irrelevant?

You asked for proof that advanced statistical analysis was being used by professionals. I provided a link giving you exactly what you asked for. Again, how is that irrelevant?

Your link gave a list of people using "advanced stats". You know how broad that is? Again, i have to keep repeating myself because you guys are so hurt. But when i think of advanced stats, I think of those silly stats on bballrefernce.com. The link you provided gave no insight as to what these teams consider advanced stats... You get that?

Hawkeye15
10-06-2011, 03:55 PM
Uh oh, its passive aggressive time from the "respected PSD posters".. I proved my point, no one proved anything to me. Someone said i should google something i care nothing about, but he cant google to show me what i need to see. Would rather me take his word for it. Someone suggest i read a book. No one can find anything in mainstream media about advanced stats.. MAINSTREAM MEDIA. Haven't seen it yet. So thanks guys, you won again.

why did you come here? If you are only interested in mainstream media and conversations about how awesome our local players are, then get an insider subscription and talk with your co-workers at the water cooler at work. Many came here, and to other various sports forums, to talk to fans that look much deeper than normal fans. Do you not consider John Hollinger, Henry Abbot, and many others in the "mainstream" media, that use advanced statistics constantly, any evidence at all that the statistics movement is gaining steam?

You will have to forgive those here who honestly don't care about a poster's "opinion", when they state it as fact, and give a "lmao!" as a response to someone disagreeing with them.

We get it. You hate advanced stats, and think they have no place in a basketball discussion. That is fine. But either understand the information is now out there to dissect players and teams even further, or get over it and just continue to state your personal opinions as if they are fact and move on.

Why would anyone spend time digging up resources for you, when all you ever do is shoot them down immediately? Why even put effort into it.

Its a fact- Shane Battier has openly said he uses advanced metrics to scout his opponents. Its a fact, most of the teams in the NBA now employ advanced statistics guys in their scouting department. Its a fact, there are plenty of voters for NBA awards that use them. I don't feel like spending time linking these facts, if you actually care, google them your self, and they are right there for you.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 03:56 PM
We gave you facts, links, articles, quotes etc what have you given us? Also reply to my post to you about the Stats coach.

First of all your lying. You didn't give me any facts, you gave me 1 article and the quotes were in that one article. The other guys "link" was weak. Stop reaching. And what do you want me to give you? What point am i arguing that you want me to prove?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:56 PM
Your link gave a list of people using "advanced stats". You know how broad that is? Again, i have to keep repeating myself because you guys are so hurt. But when i think of advanced stats, I think of those silly stats on bballrefernce.com. The link you provided gave no insight as to what these teams consider advanced stats... You get that?

That is a link to the teams in which have advanced statisticians as part of their staffs. :confused:

See what I'm talking about? Lack of basic comprehension skills. You don't even take the time to understand it. :pity:

Baller1
10-06-2011, 03:56 PM
Your link gave a list of people using "advanced stats". You know how broad that is? Again, i have to keep repeating myself because you guys are so hurt. But when i think of advanced stats, I think of those silly stats on bballrefernce.com. The link you provided gave no insight as to what these teams consider advanced stats... You get that?

So now you want us to give you a definition of advanced statistics? My god, you're hopeless. It really isn't that hard to look up what is and isn't considered an advanced statistic.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 03:59 PM
First of all your lying. You didn't give me any facts, you gave me 1 article and the quotes were in that one article. The other guys "link" was weak. Stop reaching. And what do you want me to give you? What point am i arguing that you want me to prove?

I reached?

All I did was give you facts. I did not give you any quotes. I quoted what was in the link.

All I gave was facts.

The point I'm trying to prove to you? Simply that you're wrong about every single thing you've said in this thread and every poster has done a very good job of proving just that.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:01 PM
So now you want us to give you a definition of advanced statistics? My god, you're hopeless. It really isn't that hard to look up what is and isn't considered an advanced statistic.

your link didnt dude.. You guys are funny..

Chronz
10-06-2011, 04:02 PM
lol.. Using google isn't heavy lifting. Your trying to prove a point to me. Prove the point. Im sure you went to college. I'm sure you never turned a paper in without siting a source. You cant tell your professor to google the information if he/she doesn't agree with itSome of the FACTS I provided could be hard to find online because they came from written sources, people who write books tend to want you to buy the book in order to get that information.
Using google to find a specific quote or article can be a chore, I know. Im sure I could find anything eventually but in face of such a weak defense, why would I bother. What effort have you put into proving your opinion?

Using your comparison, had you been held in high regard as my professor and were this piece of writing being submitted, I would have come with the fire.

Sadly your not a professor and this isnt college, your a man with a hypothesis and no proof.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:02 PM
I reached?

All I did was give you facts. I did not give you any quotes. I quoted what was in the link.

All I gave was facts.

The point I'm trying to prove to you? Simply that you're wrong about every single thing you've said in this thread and every poster has done a very good job of proving just that.

Im wrong because PSD says so? fine. I'll agree with that.

Hawkeye15
10-06-2011, 04:03 PM
as I stated very early in the thread, the people who refuse to embrace advanced stats are typically one of the following:

Much older than most of us, and it just doesn't suit them to bother with them. I respect this.

Fans of players that advanced stats show large flaws in their games, and this fan is taken back that Kobe may never have been the best player in any given year, or that Allen Iverson was never a top 5 player in the NBA. These fans get upset when their lifelong opinions on games, or a player, are shown to be flawed, therefore stats are useless.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:03 PM
Some of the FACTS I provided could be hard to find online because they came from written sources, people who write books tend to want you to buy the book in order to get that information.
Using google to find a specific quote or article can be a chore, I know. Im sure I could find anything eventually but in face of such a weak defense, why would I bother. What effort have you put into proving your opinion?

Using your comparison, had you been held in high regard as my professor and were this piece of writing being submitted, I would have come with the fire.

Sadly your not a professor and this isnt college, your a man with a hypothesis and no proof.

Exactly, this isnt college...

Baller1
10-06-2011, 04:03 PM
your link didnt dude.. You guys are funny..

You're basically implying that you don't know what an advanced statistic is. If that's the case, then why the **** are you arguing against them?

You've literally done nothing but derail this thread with immaturity and completely stubborn opinions.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 04:04 PM
So now you want us to give you a definition of advanced statistics? My god, you're hopeless. It really isn't that hard to look up what is and isn't considered an advanced statistic.

All those statisticians use many different forms of advanced statistics. Dan Rosenbaum is the inventor of Statistical plus/minus (SPM), Roland Beech in the inventor of Roland (Simple) Rating. Just two examples of advanced stats in which he didn't mention that they are using. They all use all variations of advanced metrics but he doesn't care dude he doesn't care he has no way of understanding that.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 04:04 PM
Exactly, this isnt college...
LOL :facepalm:

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:04 PM
You guys that are so mad.. http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2011/03/the_great_carmelo_debate.2.html

Give this a read and take a deep breath. Your aggression toward people that don't respect advanced stats is silly... This article takes on both sides

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:05 PM
LOL :facepalm:

I like the passive aggression.. Just read the link i posted and drink a beer... You guys are getting beside yourselves...

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 04:06 PM
Im wrong because PSD says so? fine. I'll agree with that.

Give us a simple fact to support your arguments. A link, an article, a quote a youtube video something.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 04:07 PM
Whos mad?

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:07 PM
I also like how some of you want to start trying to insult me for not agreeing with you. One thing i will say about people who use advanced stats, you sure do have a narcissistic attitude.. with a side of chip on your shoulder... lol

Baller1
10-06-2011, 04:07 PM
You guys that are so mad.. http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2011/03/the_great_carmelo_debate.2.html

Give this a read and take a deep breath. Your aggression toward people that don't respect advanced stats is silly... This article takes on both sides

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Those first two paragraphs just legitimized everything Chronz, Swash, Hawk, and I have been saying. Thank you sir, case closed.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 04:07 PM
I like the passive aggression.. Just read the link i posted and drink a beer... You guys are getting beside yourselves...
LOL :facepalm:

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:08 PM
Whos mad?

You clearly are buddy

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:08 PM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Those first two paragraphs just legitimized everything Chronz, Swashbuckling, Hawk, and I have been saying. Thank you sir, case closed.

Its 2 pages genius.. Im done talking to you.. I clearly said when i first posted the link that it says something for both sides.. smh

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:10 PM
Give us a simple fact to support your arguments. A link, an article, a quote a youtube video something.

I posted a dual sided link.. But whats my argument? Im simply saying that I dont believe these stats are relevant

Baller1
10-06-2011, 04:11 PM
Today about half of NBA teams work with statisticians, and they tend to outperform those that don't. But the heyday of the all-in-one advanced-box-score stat may actually be behind us; coaches now chart players' strengths and weaknesses using services that slice up piles of game film into digestible pieces. That lets them scrutinize the quality of pick-and-rolls and investigate whether their power forwards are better attacking the basket from the left or right post. There are statistics involved, but in the end a flesh-and-blood human must sit there and fix his eyeballs on the tape.
Dean Oliver, the founding father of hoops math, who now runs the numbers for all of ESPN, says the main benefit of statistical analysis is simply that it lets coaches keeps tabs on more games. "The numbers do not see any individual game as well as a person. But they see all of the games," he said. In the next breath, though, Oliver stated with confidence that Dwayne Wade is the "most important guy to take away" on the Miami Heat—not LeBron James. "Not everybody knows that," he said—including many opposing coaches who appear to be keying on LeBron. So how did he know that? His computerized mathematical game-analysis tool, called Roboscout, told him. "It's not an obvious thing when you watch the game," he said. "But when you do the analysis, that comes out."


Those two paragraphs just stated everything we've been telling you. Yet, when we posted them, you said it was just opinion. Now, you've just posted the evidence. Nicely done.

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 04:12 PM
You guys that are so mad.. http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2011/03/the_great_carmelo_debate.2.html

Give this a read and take a deep breath. Your aggression toward people that don't respect advanced stats is silly... This article takes on both sides


You do realize that that article in essence agrees with everything we've been saying here thus far right?

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 04:14 PM
I posted a dual sided link.. But whats my argument? Im simply saying that I dont believe these stats are relevant

You posted a link saying everything myself, Chronz, baller and Hawk have been trying to tell you but you disregarded all that we said. You said that they weren't facts but they said the very same thing in that article that we've been telling you for the past 3+ pages.

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 04:15 PM
as I stated very early in the thread, the people who refuse to embrace advanced stats are typically one of the following:

Much older than most of us, and it just doesn't suit them to bother with them. I respect this.

Fans of players that advanced stats show large flaws in their games, and this fan is taken back that Kobe may never have been the best player in any given year, or that Allen Iverson was never a top 5 player in the NBA. These fans get upset when their lifelong opinions on games, or a player, are shown to be flawed, therefore stats are useless.

Or they're people who are really ignorant but really proud of their ignorance. I see a lot more of that type of person in this thread than the other two types.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 04:15 PM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Those first two paragraphs just legitimized everything Chronz, Swashbuckling, Hawk, and I have been saying. Thank you sir, case closed.

LOL his link actually had one of the links that I was talking about. In that post he provided theres a link to how Bosh saw his game changed based on efficiency metrics, and how the coaches projected the Big3's stats and responsibilities.

Chronz
10-06-2011, 04:17 PM
You clearly are buddy

LOL the guy whos saying we should just go our separate ways is the one whos mad? :facepalm:

Baller1
10-06-2011, 04:17 PM
Man, I love being right.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:25 PM
Awww man, u guys got me. What can i say, i cant outsmart PSD!!

Rentzias
10-06-2011, 04:26 PM
Steve Kerr, on three point shooting:
"One thing is, mathematically, if you hit two out of five, then you’re doing great. The new stat now in the NBA that everybody’s using is “effective field goal percentage,” where you factor in the point total. Maybe the percentages aren’t as good, but the value is there. And so you have more and more teams launching threes, and they’re designing their offense based on that. You’re seeing more inside-out stuff and drive-and-kick at the pro level and less motion, passing, screening, and the 17-foot shots that you used to see." (http://www.athlonsports.com/columns/athlon-interview/athlon-interview-steve-kerr)

(2005 Article http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1105478/index.htm)
"Says (Sonics exec)Walker, 'In the bigger picture it is helpful. It does allow us to do apples-to-apples comparisons of players and combinations. Data points you can add to the old-fashioned [measures].'"

"While (Celtics Senior VP) Morey by no means ignores points per game, rebounds per game and other statistics popularly held up as benchmarks of success, he also recognizes that those numbers can inflate (or deflate) a player's value. Instead he is constantly looking for other, more obscure indicators of success such as turnover ratios, eFG% (a weighted field goal percentage that takes into account the added value of three-pointers) and productivity per possession."

"Last spring, for example, as the Sonics prepared to face the Spurs in the second round of the playoffs, (Dean) Oliver turned up evidence that while San Antonio was a dominant defensive team, particularly in the paint, it was not bulletproof. 'When you go at the midrange, there was a big hole,' he explains. 'Compared to the rest of the league, the Spurs are 30-35 percent less vulnerable than the rest of the league from three-point land but 30 percent more vulnerable from midrange.' So, partly on Oliver's advice, the Sonics pulled up for 15- to 18-foot jumper after jumper. In the end Seattle increased its midrange shooting more than any other Spurs opponent and surprised many people by taking a superior San Antonio team to six games. 'If you have a good midrange game against us, you have a better chance,' confirms Spurs assistant Mike Budenholzer. 'And with the Sonics, since we wanted to keep them off the three-point line, that left us weaker in the midrange game.'"

"Last year, after Game 5 of Dallas's second-round playoff series against Phoenix, Winston sent an e-mail that broke down how different Mavs combinations fared against various Phoenix lineups. The correspondence highlighted a recurrent postseason theme. As Winston wrote, in scenario after scenario, 'Daniels Stack horrible,' 'Daniels and Stack a disaster,' 'Stack and Daniels a killer.' In each situation the team fared poorly--a minus-13 point differential here, a minus-15 point differential there--when Marquis Daniels and Jerry Stackhouse play together. Harris discussed the findings with Johnson, who took them into account in substitution patterns (he didn't even play Daniels in Game 6), even if they weren't easily explained. 'It didn't make sense to us why,' says Harris. 'Both are good players, and both do well with other combinations. But together, it didn't work out.'"

Swashcuff
10-06-2011, 04:31 PM
Awww man, u guys got me. What can i say, i cant outsmart PSD!!

Not just PSD but knowledgeable fans, FO personnel, coaches and players everywhere.

You proved it yourself that we here at PSD aren't the only NBA fans who appreciate the importance of the advancement in statistics.

nickdymez
10-06-2011, 04:35 PM
Good post rentzias, your the only one in this thread i take serious. Didnt get defensive at all, just posted. And i dont believe anyone on psd works in the front office of a basketbal franchise

69centers
10-06-2011, 10:48 PM
people on this forum who know and use advanced stats are the smart people. People on this forum who discount advanced stats are the people who don't understand them, i.e. the stupid people. That's all there is to it.

Most ignorant post of the month.


There are like 5 guys on this site that will kill for advanced stats. While the rest of the world doesn't care at all..

Truest post of the month.


just holding an intelligent debate on PSD seems like a big deal...

The problem with you anti-stats people is that your arguments are crippled, you're at a loss as soon as somebody asks you to prove your assertions.

We don't have to. You guys are the minority .. the little people, trying to change the basketball stat world. Unfortunately guys, it will never happen in your lifetime.


Was about to post it but when it comes to dealing with that poster their is NO WAY we're going to do anything to have him think differently.

I believe the number of teams has since gone up however. It's up to 22.

22 out of 30 organizations use advanced stats. I wonder what those who like to be in the majority have to say about this?

I know what they'll say it doesn't mean anything since it isn't 30. :pity:

So, how many people in each organization actually use advanced stats? How about I give you 10. 10 x 22 = 220 people. My lord, an avalanche of people use advanced stats. :worthy:


Its not a fact because you say so. Link please.. And being accepted is one thing, but respected is another.. Like i said, i am aware of advanced stats. But i dont take them into consideration at all...

They don't hear comments like this. There is simply no comprehension on their part that anyone who dismissed advanced stats must 1) not know anything about them and 2) know absolutely nothing about the game of basketball. It's the biggest farce I've ever seen on the internet. Can't even believe I waste my time typing things like this.


The fact that you people get so upset when someone doesn't agree with the relevance of advance stats makes your arguments even weaker.

Well said.

RZZZA
10-06-2011, 11:31 PM
I wouldn't presume to say you know NOTHING about basketball, but you just CAN'T know SOME things without looking up stats.

It's a compilation of information much like a dictionary or an almanac. I doubt you can memorize all the info in an almanac.

What do you do if you need to know a players efficiency? Just watching the game can't give you good insight into that.

Baller1
10-06-2011, 11:55 PM
Most ignorant post of the month.



Truest post of the month.



We don't have to. You guys are the minority .. the little people, trying to change the basketball stat world. Unfortunately guys, it will never happen in your lifetime.



So, how many people in each organization actually use advanced stats? How about I give you 10. 10 x 22 = 220 people. My lord, an avalanche of people use advanced stats. :worthy:



They don't hear comments like this. There is simply no comprehension on their part that anyone who dismissed advanced stats must 1) not know anything about them and 2) know absolutely nothing about the game of basketball. It's the biggest farce I've ever seen on the internet. Can't even believe I waste my time typing things like this.



Well said.

Way to pick and choose which posts catered to your opinions the best. How convenient!

LA_Raiders
10-07-2011, 12:18 AM
Advance stats don't take game scenarios into consideration.. Like when ppl say kobe isnt really clutch, but don't look at the bigger picture and how Kobe is doubled and some times triple teamed to get off one shot to win a game.. Sometimes there useful sometimes their misleading

agree

beasted86
10-07-2011, 12:30 AM
People form inaccurate opinions by relying on advanced stats too much. Many of the advanced stats have loopholes and flaws in their formulas that don't account for certain things and that can skew the results, and some people choose to overlook them despite that fact.

Personally, I'm not a fan. There are enough high detail base stats such as pace, floor area shooting charts, and detailed on-off floor stats for numerous lineups within the same team that give us enough precise info to rely on.

tredigs
10-07-2011, 12:39 AM
People form inaccurate opinions by relying on advanced stats too much. Many of the advanced stats have loopholes and flaws in their formulas that don't account for certain things and that can skew the results, and some people choose to overlook them despite that fact.

Personally, I'm not a fan. There are enough high detail base stats such as pace, floor area shooting charts, and detailed on-off floor stats for numerous lineups within the same team that give us enough precise info to rely on.

I love that you have an arbitrary line of "high-detailed base stats" that you find perfectly helpful and simultaneously are "not a fan" of advanced stats.

Fe-y

beasted86
10-07-2011, 12:51 AM
I love that you have an arbitrary line of "high-detailed base stats" that you find perfectly helpful and simultaneously are "not a fan" of advanced stats.

Fe-y

I don't understand what your saying... but to make it clear, I'd rather look at assisted % and floor shooting charts than TS% to see who a more effective shooter is. I'd rather look at unadjusted on/off court metrics than DRtg to see who a better defender is... and so forth.

tredigs
10-07-2011, 12:56 AM
I don't understand what your saying... but to make it clear, I'd rather look at assisted % and floor shooting charts than TS% to see who a more effective shooter is. I'd rather look at unadjusted on/off court metrics than DRtg to see who a better defender is... and so forth.

When is the last time you have seen assist% uttered by a broadcaster on TNT or ESPN Beasted? Or used in ANY common conversation with some dudes (who just watch games - don't care about further analysis) on any given Friday night following a nights games.


You're a fan of advanced stats, you just have your favorites. Welcome to the party.

beasted86
10-07-2011, 01:40 AM
When is the last time you have seen assist% uttered by a broadcaster on TNT or ESPN Beasted? Or used in ANY common conversation with some dudes (who just watch games - don't care about further analysis) on any given Friday night following a nights games.


You're a fan of advanced stats, you just have your favorites. Welcome to the party.

I consider advanced stats any collective rating: PER, EFF, ORtg, DRtg, WS, etc... or the advanced % stats: USG%, AST%, BLK%, TS%, etc. Basically any stat derived from a formula other than simple arithmetic from totals of the category.

If I wanted to know what a player's assist percentage is, it should be the team total assists per game divided by player total assists per game... not: 100 * AST / (((MP / (Tm MP / 5)) * Tm FG) - FG). <--- This is what advanced stats are IMO.

tredigs
10-07-2011, 01:59 AM
I consider advanced stats any collective rating: PER, EFF, ORtg, DRtg, WS, etc... or the advanced % stats: USG%, AST%, BLK%, TS%, etc. Basically any stat derived from a formula other than simple arithmetic from totals of the category.

If I wanted to know what a player's assist percentage is, it should be the team total assists per game divided by player total assists per game... not: 100 * AST / (((MP / (Tm MP / 5)) * Tm FG) - FG). <--- This is what advanced stats are IMO.

So you want the wrong/absolutely false version of a stat that you're actually looking for solely because the formula is longer (but seriously simple if you just take 2 minutes to look at it) than what you care for?

C'mon dude.

Baller1
10-07-2011, 03:56 AM
I consider advanced stats any collective rating: PER, EFF, ORtg, DRtg, WS, etc... or the advanced % stats: USG%, AST%, BLK%, TS%, etc. Basically any stat derived from a formula other than simple arithmetic from totals of the category.

If I wanted to know what a player's assist percentage is, it should be the team total assists per game divided by player total assists per game... not: 100 * AST / (((MP / (Tm MP / 5)) * Tm FG) - FG). <--- This is what advanced stats are IMO.

Beasted, you're a smart dude, but you're basically overcomplicating things to disprove your own opinions.

In essence, what you're saying is that you're a fan of the advanced statistical movement, but you just have your own opinions and preferences of it. That's honestly all it is.

PatsSoxKnicks
10-07-2011, 04:13 AM
Dean Oliver left the Nuggets to join ESPN, Dean Oliver was the guy behind the Ty Lawson/Afflalo deal, moves he based heavily on their Off.RTG in certain play sets.

Did you read about that somewhere? I think he liked Lawson's defensive #'s too.

BTW, what were the questions you wanted me to ask him? I'm going to ask about meeting him again at some point (I thought I would see him around the office more but I haven't. I've been corresponding strictly through e-mails, which are erratic due to him being busy).

bagwell368
10-07-2011, 07:08 AM
We don't have to. You guys are the minority .. the little people, trying to change the basketball stat world. Unfortunately guys, it will never happen in your lifetime.

The penetration of advanced stats is baseball since in mid 1980's is staggering and too well known to bother reviewing.

The penetration of stats such as QBR, and the various "+" stats such as Rate+ for QB's has taken off these past years.

For basketball stats such as PER, WS, OWS, DWS, WS/48, ORtg, and DRtg have all started to show up in print, and on broadcasts.

The cat is already out of the bag, while advanced stats in basketball will not attain the same penetration that they have in baseball, they already have a foothold.


There is simply no comprehension on their part that anyone who dismissed advanced stats must 1) not know anything about them and 2) know absolutely nothing about the game of basketball. It's the biggest farce I've ever seen on the internet. Can't even believe I waste my time typing things like this.

There is no way to conclude someone knows or does not know the game well based on their interest in or understanding of advanced stats. Anyone that says that has made a mistake. The most that can be said about people that do - is that they found out about them and pursued them to some extent.

OTOH it's easy to tell from posters that write a lot, what general age they are, how much they have seen, and what sort of conclusions that they have. What sort of conclusions could be drawn from that? LOL, just study the output of the poster over time, they are clear to anyone with time and an eye for detail.

Chronz
10-07-2011, 07:13 AM
Did you read about that somewhere? I think he liked Lawson's defensive #'s too.

BTW, what were the questions you wanted me to ask him? I'm going to ask about meeting him again at some point (I thought I would see him around the office more but I haven't. I've been corresponding strictly through e-mails, which are erratic due to him being busy).
Not in those words, just him mentioning the impressive individual offensive/defensive ratings of Lawson in College as a reason they were sold on him.

beasted86
10-07-2011, 11:54 AM
So you want the wrong/absolutely false version of a stat that you're actually looking for solely because the formula is longer (but seriously simple if you just take 2 minutes to look at it) than what you care for?

C'mon dude.


Beasted, you're a smart dude, but you're basically overcomplicating things to disprove your own opinions.

In essence, what you're saying is that you're a fan of the advanced statistical movement, but you just have your own opinions and preferences of it. That's honestly all it is.

I think there is a clear difference. To try and make it clearer, yes, I believe in "advanced metrics", not "advanced statistics".

Advanced metrics are detailed measurements of the game, based on totals. Pace is a metric, it's just a measurement of total shots by the team. Assisted% is a metric, it's just a measurement of which field goals out of their total that a player was passed the ball before his field goal. Etc...

All "advanced statistics" have a formula that's supposed to compensate for something, and somehow make it more detailed supposedly. TS% is based on a formula to compensate for FT attempts, and weights points totals the same as shot attempts. So basically a guy who shot 12/12 equals a guy who shot 8/12. They are supposedly equally efficient scorers... this I don't believe is accurate whatsoever.

You guys might think I'm splitting hairs, but none of the categories I rely on to make an analysis are listed under "Advanced stats" on Basketball-Reference or Hoop Data or any of these other basketball statistics sites, they are a totally separate category. So, yes, I believe in advanced something... but not what most websites categorize as "Advanced stats".

mightybosstone
10-07-2011, 12:11 PM
You "anti advanced stats" people are just stubborn, and frankly, I find it pretty foolish. Look at baseball and how they've openly adopted OBP and OPS, statistics which have become arguably more significant in determining a player's value than BA and RBIs.

Just because advanced stats are new and complicated doesn't mean they don't have value or shouldn't be an adequate way to determine a player's value. If you're just going to ignore them in favor of PPG, RPG, etc., then you're only getting part of the picture. And I'm not just talking about PER, WS, DRtg, ORtg, etc. What about assist, turnover, rebound, steal and block percentages? I think those are extremely useful statistics, not particularly complicated to understand and arguably just as valuable as per game numbers.

Bottom line, no statistic in any sport is perfect and there is always a need for people to watch the games and develop their own opinions of players. But there is also a need for statistics which can measure a player's value over time, and I don't understand how ANYONE can use PPG or FG% and then try to devalue TS% or PER. Just because a stat is simpler to understand does not necessarily make it better. And if you're going to devalue one statistic, then you need to throw them all out.

MTar786
10-07-2011, 12:42 PM
I also like how some of you want to start trying to insult me for not agreeing with you. One thing i will say about people who use advanced stats, you sure do have a narcissistic attitude.. with a side of chip on your shoulder... lol

seriously, dont waste your time with them. They seem so angry about life.. like they have to be right lol. They get mad if you dont agree them and then try to internet bully you. They cant accept how society has not jumoed into the advanced stat system it kills them. They probably have no life. they think this system will make them the next steve jobs or something lol. If you argue they will tell you you know nothing about basketball when infact you probably know a lot more since you WATCH instead of calculate the sport

Baller1
10-07-2011, 12:51 PM
seriously, dont waste your time with them. They seem so angry about life.. like they have to be right lol. They get mad if you dont agree them and then try to internet bully you. They cant accept how society has not jumoed into the advanced stat system it kills them. They probably have no life. they think this system will make them the next steve jobs or something lol. If you argue they will tell you you know nothing about basketball when infact you probably know a lot more since you WATCH instead of calculate the sport

You're not naive enough to believe that statisticians don't watch the sport, are you?

RZZZA
10-07-2011, 01:00 PM
I think there is a clear difference. To try and make it clearer, yes, I believe in "advanced metrics", not "advanced statistics".

Advanced metrics are detailed measurements of the game, based on totals. Pace is a metric, it's just a measurement of total shots by the team. Assisted% is a metric, it's just a measurement of which field goals out of their total that a player was passed the ball before his field goal. Etc...

All "advanced statistics" have a formula that's supposed to compensate for something, and somehow make it more detailed supposedly. TS% is based on a formula to compensate for FT attempts, and weights points totals the same as shot attempts. So basically a guy who shot 12/12 equals a guy who shot 8/12. They are supposedly equally efficient scorers... this I don't believe is accurate whatsoever.

You guys might think I'm splitting hairs, but none of the categories I rely on to make an analysis are listed under "Advanced stats" on Basketball-Reference or Hoop Data or any of these other basketball statistics sites, they are a totally separate category. So, yes, I believe in advanced something... but not what most websites categorize as "Advanced stats".


Oh yeah? Well MTar thinks you're a computer, you don't watch the game, you're angry about life, you get mad if you disagree with someone, you're an internet bully, you can't accept how society has not jumped on the advanced stat bandwagon, you have no life, and you think you're going to be the next Steve Jobs.



:laugh:

mightybosstone
10-07-2011, 01:04 PM
seriously, dont waste your time with them. They seem so angry about life.. like they have to be right lol. They get mad if you dont agree them and then try to internet bully you. They cant accept how society has not jumoed into the advanced stat system it kills them. They probably have no life. they think this system will make them the next steve jobs or something lol. If you argue they will tell you you know nothing about basketball when infact you probably know a lot more since you WATCH instead of calculate the sport

What the hell are you talking about? It takes all of about 30 seconds for me to pull up basketball reference or ESPN to look at stats. Do you think I spend my days calculating them or something? I probably spend just as much time checking my facts before I post as you do. Also, I didn't create the statistics, and I'm not even sure how to calculate some of them. Just because we use different ways of measuring players' abilities doesn't make us any different as fans than you. This entire post is just ****ing ignorant...

PatsSoxKnicks
10-07-2011, 01:54 PM
Not in those words, just him mentioning the impressive individual offensive/defensive ratings of Lawson in College as a reason they were sold on him.

Yeah, found that in this article:
http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_13541239

George Karl's brains. I lol'd at that but it probably was true.

Hawkeye15
10-07-2011, 03:46 PM
Or they're people who are really ignorant but really proud of their ignorance. I see a lot more of that type of person in this thread than the other two types.

well that fits into #2 honestly. Those who just refuse to embrace something that could possibly show their opinions are wrong

Chronz
10-07-2011, 04:46 PM
I think there is a clear difference. To try and make it clearer, yes, I believe in "advanced metrics", not "advanced statistics".
There is no difference, any statistical assessment that takes into consideration the variables of pace and/or accounts for the value of a possession/3pt shot is an advanced stat. Stats are stats, PERIOD. You can believe in APBR without believing in every metric everyone from the community conjures up. Win Score is an advanced stat thats not listed on BBR, mainly because its not accepted outside of its circle. You have your own circle of faith with whatever stats you want to value, they still fall under advanced stats in any important sense of the word.


Advanced metrics are detailed measurements of the game, based on totals. Pace is a metric, it's just a measurement of total shots by the team. Assisted% is a metric, it's just a measurement of which field goals out of their total that a player was passed the ball before his field goal. Etc...

I dont know where you get your info but pace factor is much more than that, depending on the analyst, some people subtract offensive rebounds from the new possession tally and others dont. More effort has been put into pace factor to separate it into Offense/Defense but I get the feeling the more intricate (which in some cases equates to improved accuracy) isnt your cup of tea.


All "advanced statistics" have a formula that's supposed to compensate for something, and somehow make it more detailed supposedly.
Supposedly? The only subjective element in the formula is that it accounts for AND1's and Techs on average. Even sticklers for accuracy admit the difference between the estimate and the most extreme beneficiary is negligible.


TS% is based on a formula to compensate for FT attempts, and weights points totals the same as shot attempts. So basically a guy who shot 12/12 equals a guy who shot 8/12.
Actually it weighs them slightly more (again due to the .44 multiplier). Still I dont understand your comparison, a guy who shot 12/12 scored more efficiently than the guy who shot 8/12.


They are supposedly equally efficient scorers... this I don't believe is accurate whatsoever.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever? Cuz the community is united on a few fronts, when it comes to measuring efficiency the correlation to winning is no coincidence. The pecking order gos as follows, FG%, eFG%, TS%, PPP. You can believe what you wish, but the point of advanced stats/metrics (whatever you wish to label them) is to get the most accurate descriptions.

I mean from the sounds of your post its as if your against something I consider to be the most basic of all stats. Points Per Possession. How simple of a concept is that, yet you would be against it because it involves an equation? And if you dont have a problem with PPP then how can you have a problem with TS%?


You guys might think I'm splitting hairs, but none of the categories I rely on to make an analysis are listed under "Advanced stats" on Basketball-Reference or Hoop Data or any of these other basketball statistics sites, they are a totally separate category. So, yes, I believe in advanced something... but not what most websites categorize as "Advanced stats".

Ive never seen your stats anywhere so it doesnt really matter, there are alot of advanced stats that arent on BBR.

Tony_Starks
10-07-2011, 05:35 PM
My only problem withly hard core stat people is that sometimes they take the subjectivity out of the equation. You may have stats to back your opinion but that are always other things to factor in. If I ask which team was more defensively impressive and intimidating the '89 Pistons or the '07 Celtics I don't want a huge barrage of stats to prove your point. Or if I say what was more impressive Magic's Lakers beating Boston or MJ's Bulls beating Utah again I want to hear something besides only stats because there is a whole discussion outside of the stat sheet in both cases.......

Hawkeye15
10-07-2011, 05:48 PM
My only problem withly hard core stat people is that sometimes they take the subjectivity out of the equation. You may have stats to back your opinion but that are always other things to factor in. If I ask which team was more defensively impressive and intimidating the '89 Pistons or the '07 Celtics I don't want a huge barrage of stats to prove your point. Or if I say what was more impressive Magic's Lakers beating Boston or MJ's Bulls beating Utah again I want to hear something besides only stats because there is a whole discussion outside of the stat sheet in both cases.......

but why can't stats be used as part of the argument? If a team has a much stronger defensive rating per possessions, shouldn't that factor in? Shouldn't teams be compared to those that have played before or after them using some sort of real evidence in where those teams were in respect to the rest of the league, and compared to the team you are judging them against?

If you want to talk about pure opinions with no basis but that person's emotional opinions on the subject, by all means, do so. But many would rather have more in depth discussions.

It doesn't mean we sound like robots. It means when we have a pile of evidence that shows our opinion holds merit, we are going to provide it.

Tony_Starks
10-07-2011, 06:07 PM
but why can't stats be used as part of the argument? If a team has a much stronger defensive rating per possessions, shouldn't that factor in? Shouldn't teams be compared to those that have played before or after them using some sort of real evidence in where those teams were in respect to the rest of the league, and compared to the team you are judging them against?

If you want to talk about pure opinions with no basis but that person's emotional opinions on the subject, by all means, do so. But many would rather have more in depth discussions.

It doesn't mean we sound like robots. It means when we have a pile of evidence that shows our opinion holds merit, we are going to provide it.



I definitely agree that stats should have a bearing on the debate. But my thing is just like Im never going to go sheer opinion, it shouldn't be sheer stats either. Each has their own importance but I think people sometimes lose the balance between the two. You may have your evidence, for example, on why team A was better than team B. I might come back with well when you factor in the competition they faced, the rules in place for both teams, watering down of the league due to free agency, etc...etc... then I think we both have valuable arguments. So to me I think both the stat and the subjective have equal importance.