PDA

View Full Version : Who Gains/Loses the Most if Advanced Stats Come 20 Years Ealier



Guppyfighter
12-28-2012, 10:03 PM
Sister thread from the baseball forum. Felt it was interesting enough to ask here.

Chronz
12-28-2012, 10:28 PM
Thats a good question but I would have to look a few names up. Off the top of my head Im thinking Charles Barkley would be looked at differently. Still its kind of hard to gauge when you dont know what public perception is anyways.

Jamiecballer
12-28-2012, 10:45 PM
you stole my thread. that is all.

Guppyfighter
12-28-2012, 10:46 PM
you stole my thread. that is all.

lol Didn't I say it was a thread from the baseball forum?

Jamiecballer
12-28-2012, 10:49 PM
lol Didn't I say it was a thread from the baseball forum?

well good luck to you in generating more interest than the baseball one got (not much).

Jamiecballer
12-28-2012, 10:52 PM
loses the most - Iverson. in the light of advanced stats he looks an awful lot like Monta Ellis.

Swashcuff
12-28-2012, 11:05 PM
loses the most - Iverson. in the light of advanced stats he looks an awful lot like Monta Ellis.

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

Not a good comparison by any means. That's more of an "eye" comparison than a statistical.

Swashcuff
12-28-2012, 11:07 PM
Everyone is different but A.I.'s advanced stats have given me a greater understanding and appreciation for him and as a result I think I like him even more. He was never great in terms of advanced metrics but they did one thing, they proved my beliefs on him and his role in the 76ers team to be true. The better teammates he had during his prime the better played the weaker the teammates the more he struggled and had to force it on too many occasions. His advanced stats reflect this.

b@llhog24
12-28-2012, 11:08 PM
Squid.

Swashcuff
12-28-2012, 11:10 PM
Squid.

:love:

Could you imagine if we had Synergy in Squid's day :drool:

b@llhog24
12-28-2012, 11:15 PM
Squid.

:love:

Could you imagine if we had Synergy in Squid's day :drool:

:drool:

Chronz
12-28-2012, 11:23 PM
Thats the thing too, since we dont have some of the numbers available for those eras its an eye test type of thing too.

Ebbs
12-28-2012, 11:48 PM
Winning would still be #1 in the public eye.

Cromedome
12-29-2012, 03:56 AM
Advanced stats are for geeks and geeks alike.

Guppyfighter
12-29-2012, 04:17 AM
Advanced stats are for geeks and geeks alike.

Okay, Yeah, Mr. Joe cool on a sports forum.

nickdymez
12-29-2012, 04:41 AM
lol@ advanced stats

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

b@llhog24
12-29-2012, 04:43 AM
lol@ advanced stats

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

LeBron>Kobe.

Chronz
12-29-2012, 04:55 AM
Winning would still be #1 in the public eye.

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

SMH!
12-29-2012, 05:02 AM
lol@ advanced stats

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

hahahahahaha

Guppyfighter
12-29-2012, 06:22 AM
lol@ advanced stats

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

Most everyone here probably played sports at some point. And for these stats to work, they have to show why all these athletes are awesome, why some are average, and why some suck. It follows a normal bell curve and is in no way trying to get back at athletes.

YoungOne
12-29-2012, 06:44 AM
stats are just one half of the game at best.

naps
12-29-2012, 06:45 AM
lol@ advanced stats

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

Pretty sure you would suck it if Kobe was great at it.

Guppyfighter
12-29-2012, 06:45 AM
stats are just one half of the game at best.

Stop with the implications.

Everyone who uses advanced stats watch the game. That's not a common problem among stat users. Jesus.

YoungOne
12-29-2012, 06:50 AM
Stop with the implications.

Everyone who uses advanced stats watch the game. That's not a common problem among stat users. Jesus.

oh yes it is.

Bruno
12-29-2012, 07:00 AM
Thats the thing too, since we dont have some of the numbers available for those eras its an eye test type of thing too.

x2.

true shooting percentage especially. jerry west both does, and does not get shafted when it comes to true shooting percentage.

there was no three point arch in his day, thus he never took them. by the same token, the long ball didn't matter, so he probably never practiced it as much as todays players. but theres no way i buy that he wouldnt' have been excellent at it had he not practiced it, if the incentive was there.

if west played in a league where there was a three point shot, and he made it a part of his game- his TS% would certainly be higher. but there wasn't, and he didn't. thus he was, and was not shafted? i'll go ahead and :facepalm: myself on this one.

that theory applies to some of the sharp shooting early guards.

TornadoOfSouls
12-29-2012, 08:57 AM
Robinson and Malone probably. Some of the most dominant regular season numbers in NBA history from these two. They both underperformed in the playoffs but that's another story.

jp611
12-29-2012, 09:31 AM
True, even today the majority of the common NBA fan doesn't know much about statistical analysis. Just look at some of the posts in this thread. Total airheads

This

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-29-2012, 09:55 AM
Pretty sure you would suck it if Kobe was great at it.

he isnt? :confused:

Jesse2272
12-29-2012, 10:15 AM
whats the point melo would still be a cancer :D

hey happy new year

feel sorry for those not 30+ years old we witnessed the best in the game probably

TornadoOfSouls
12-29-2012, 10:28 AM
he isnt? :confused:

Nope. Far from it. His fanbase loves to call him the best player since MJ but advanced stats say it's an insult to even make the Jordan comparisons.

Advanced stats say he's never been an impactful defender, never had as impressive a peak as the other top ten all-time greats, or was ever the clutch "closer" his fans state he is. Great player but overrated based on the hype/media exposure. Part of it is Kobe too - He's far too often looked towards improving his legacy/all-time status instead of making his teams better.

Jamiecballer
12-29-2012, 11:28 AM
The first and last years of Iverson's career were the only seasons of his entire career in which he posted a negative RAPM (ranked amoung the top 10 in SGs everyone of those years). Monta Ellis? He has done so every year of his career. Never a positive statistical player.

Not a good comparison by any means.

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


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


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

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

Tony_Starks
12-29-2012, 03:49 PM
Who gains the most are obscure players. Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

ManRam
12-29-2012, 03:56 PM
Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

I don't get this statement.

abe_froman
12-29-2012, 03:58 PM
True, even today the majority of the common NBA fan doesn't know much about statistical analysis. Just look at some of the posts in this thread. Total airheads
this.

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

Chronz
12-29-2012, 04:01 PM
Who gains the most are obscure players. Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

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

ManRam
12-29-2012, 04:04 PM
lol@ advanced stats

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

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

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

bagwell368
12-29-2012, 04:08 PM
lol@ advanced stats

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

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

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

Tony_Starks
12-29-2012, 04:13 PM
How so, my love for the game has only grown now that I understand it more.


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

JerseyPalahniuk
12-29-2012, 04:16 PM
You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

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

ManRam
12-29-2012, 04:18 PM
You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

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

JasonJohnHorn
12-29-2012, 04:24 PM
I honestly don't think they change much. Advance stats help contextualize regular stats, but people have always been able to tell when a guys stats are inflated or make him look better than he actually is.

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

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

Chronz
12-29-2012, 04:30 PM
You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

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

Tony_Starks
12-29-2012, 04:31 PM
You think people that care enough to post about sports on a message board like this DON'T watch basketball?



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

You know this.

abe_froman
12-29-2012, 04:32 PM
You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......
everyone here watches games,there's no rule to say you cant do both watch games and try to have a deeper understanding of it by looking at stats.besides,do you watch every game? i'm guess not,so how can you form an pinion then since the only credible way to speak on is to have watched it?

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

Shlumpledink
12-29-2012, 04:37 PM
I don't think basketball is a game that lets you base your opinion on stats. You don't have to be smart to recognize that stats and watching the games give you two different pictures. Sometimes they overlap, sometimes they don't.

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

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

bagwell368
12-29-2012, 05:01 PM
I don't think basketball is a game that lets you base your opinion on stats. You don't have to be smart to recognize that stats and watching the games give you two different pictures. Sometimes they overlap, sometimes they don't.

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

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

I'm a fan on the East Coast, not counting Celt games and playoffs, I'm lucky to see 15 games a year on the West Coast. I have a good idea of how Westbrook plays, maybe twice a year I'll check on him via stats compared to last year. Is it ideal? No. Does it work? Not bad. Looking at him w advanced stats is more sure than PPG and APG.

Still, no matter how you slice it, the NBA on TV sucks. I've been a Coach and player for a long time I usually look at two or three things at once, very often off the ball. TV doesn't give me what I want in that regard nor do advanced stats.

Hawkeye15
12-29-2012, 05:02 PM
Who gains the most are obscure players. Who loses the most are a generation of fans that would've been basing their perception off stats instead of enjoying the game......

I don't agree at all dude. If anything, I like the game even more since I started getting into advanced stats...

Hawkeye15
12-29-2012, 05:03 PM
You actually watch the game though. You know as well as I that there a whole bunch of guys on here that just spout off stats without even watching games to either discredit a player they don't like or try to make their favorite player look better......

I think you are reaching. There may be a handful that do that, but cmon, why would anyone waste that much time on a basketball board if they don't, you know, like the game of basketball?

Chronz
12-29-2012, 05:10 PM
I honestly don't think they change much. Advance stats help contextualize regular stats, but people have always been able to tell when a guys stats are inflated or make him look better than he actually is.

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

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

Well said

nickdymez
12-29-2012, 06:59 PM
How could you like the game more by using advanced? While the game is on do you break out a calculator and start formulating W/S's? Dumb. Do you guys watch a game and say "Player "a" had a very good game". Then run to the stat site and say "I take that back, player "a" had a very bad game according to the advanced stats". Get the **** outta here and take your stupid *** stats with you. And if anyone wants to play me one on one i'll dunk on you the whole game and you can tell me what my stats were with nuts on your chin. hahahahaha

Hawkeye15
12-29-2012, 08:17 PM
How could you like the game more by using advanced? While the game is on do you break out a calculator and start formulating W/S's? Dumb. Do you guys watch a game and say "Player "a" had a very good game". Then run to the stat site and say "I take that back, player "a" had a very bad game according to the advanced stats". Get the **** outta here and take your stupid *** stats with you. And if anyone wants to play me one on one i'll dunk on you the whole game and you can tell me what my stats were with nuts on your chin. hahahahaha

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20121227/nba-predictions-2013/?sct=uk_wr_a2


Yet another analytics-driven team will win the NBA title. Since 2004, five franchises (Heat, Spurs, Celtics, Lakers and Mavericks) have won an NBA title. All five scout, coach and/or make personnel decisions as informed by analytics, and this season's eventual champion will almost certainly follow suit. Miami and Oklahoma City are the favorites from each conference, and both run quiet, diligent forays into the quantitative side of the game. The Spurs and Grizzlies are also very much a part of that conversation, with the former being among the most numbers-savvy team cultures in sports and the latter having recently hired ESPN.com stat-head John Hollinger as vice president of basketball operations. Odds are good that one of those smart, analytics-inclined teams walks away with the Larry O'Brien trophy this season, in only the latest example of new-wave thinking making a significant difference in the way basketball operations are run.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20121227/nba-predictions-2013/#ixzz2GUQcuksP


Not that I would expect you to care, but as many have told you, either accept advanced analytics, or fall behind dude. Notice your own team uses them....

nickdymez
12-29-2012, 10:06 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20121227/nba-predictions-2013/?sct=uk_wr_a2



Not that I would expect you to care, but as many have told you, either accept advanced analytics, or fall behind dude. Notice your own team uses them....

Fall behind what? Im fine just watching the games and utterly enjoying them that way

Swashcuff
12-29-2012, 11:00 PM
They both play the game for themselves first and foremost, and the statistics are awfully similar. i don't know which ones you are looking at. Not saying identical, but close. they both shoot (shot) at a low enough percentage to indicate they didn't seem to know they were hurting their teams by doing so.


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



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

According to advanced stats that's completely ignorant. A.I.'s shooting never hurt his team as every single season in his NBA career he was a positive player in terms of his offensive statistical value. Even the later years. Monta on the other hand has statistically hurt his team in every season in the league and has been of negative statistical value every year. Anyone who thinks A.I.'s shooting hurt his team in more ways than it helped 1. never watched him player and 2. don't have an understanding of the advanced stats in which they are watching.

Tony_Starks
12-29-2012, 11:15 PM
According to advanced stats that's completely ignorant. A.I.'s shooting never hurt his team as every single season in his NBA career he was a positive player in terms of his offensive statistical value. Even the later years. Monta on the other hand has statistically hurt his team in every season in the league and has been of negative statistical value every year. Anyone who thinks A.I.'s shooting hurt his team in more ways than it helped 1. never watched him player and 2. don't have an understanding of the advanced stats in which they are watching.


Well there must be a lot of people on here that fit that description because one of the most popular PSD myths is that "AI was a overrated chucker."

You know we have heard that from numerous posters for years.

Swashcuff
12-29-2012, 11:20 PM
Well there must be a lot of people on here that fit that description because one of the most popular PSD myths is that "AI was a overrated chucker."

You know we have heard that from numerous posters for years.

For those who think he's a top 10-20 player of all time they are indeed overrating him as a player. And yes he was a chucker don't think anyone would deny that but his value to his teams was evident even with his chucking ways. Could he have done things differently that would have benefited the team a bit more (as well as his #s) yes but in some circumstances it was warranted and if that is what some of his coaches wanted of him (of course not the utterly idiotic shots he took on occasion but to be a volume scorer) why should he have been any different.

The term that he was an overrated chucker has been used so much in relation to A.I. that he's actually starting to become underrated.

Hawkeye15
12-29-2012, 11:31 PM
Fall behind what? Im fine just watching the games and utterly enjoying them that way

your understanding of the game will fall behind. Believe or don't, though I know your retort...

The NBA has embraced advanced stats, the last 5 champs are onboard heavily. You can choose to ignore them and call them useless all you want, they are a large part of front offices now, whether you like them, understand them, or not. Maybe you are really bad at math, and just don't understand them, not sure. Nor do I care.

Chronz
12-30-2012, 12:22 AM
How could you like the game more by using advanced?
Prolly the same way GM's and scouts love them. By giving more accurate insight. I would delve deeper but something tells me it would fall on deaf ears

nickdymez
12-30-2012, 02:31 PM
your understanding of the game will fall behind. Believe or don't, though I know your retort...

The NBA has embraced advanced stats, the last 5 champs are onboard heavily. You can choose to ignore them and call them useless all you want, they are a large part of front offices now, whether you like them, understand them, or not. Maybe you are really bad at math, and just don't understand them, not sure. Nor do I care.


Prolly the same way GM's and scouts love them. By giving more accurate insight. I would delve deeper but something tells me it would fall on deaf ears

Are any of you two in a front office of an NBA team? If not, then why bother? I'd imagine that front office's are using them because they believe it gives them some sort of advantage. Fans using them as a way to "enjoy the game better" is ridiculous to me. Enjoy the game by grabbing a beer, sitting with some friends, and just watching what transpires.

ATL#22
12-30-2012, 02:41 PM
This thread made look up Ryan's BB rate :puke:

Alayla
12-30-2012, 03:02 PM
loses the most - Iverson. in the light of advanced stats he looks an awful lot like Monta Ellis.

LOL...... are you srs right now?

Alayla
12-30-2012, 03:04 PM
Everyone is different but A.I.'s advanced stats have given me a greater understanding and appreciation for him and as a result I think I like him even more. He was never great in terms of advanced metrics but they did one thing, they proved my beliefs on him and his role in the 76ers team to be true. The better teammates he had during his prime the better played the weaker the teammates the more he struggled and had to force it on too many occasions. His advanced stats reflect this.

This

Chronz
12-30-2012, 04:20 PM
Are any of you two in a front office of an NBA team? If not, then why bother?
Because I love everything about the game. More insight = more fun. I honestly dont know how much easier I can spell that out for you.


Fans using them as a way to "enjoy the game better" is ridiculous to me. Enjoy the game by grabbing a beer, sitting with some friends, and just watching what transpires.
Just watching? LMFAO, no offense but that sounds awfully boring. Your telling me you never engage in debates with your friends while you watch? I do, I love it, ESPECIALLY if we've been drinking. I dont want to come off conceded but Im kind of a big deal, Im the big fish in a small pond when Im with my friends.

Yes, we know we're not GM's but that doesn't mean we cant at least try to approximate their methodology. Stats arent perfect, never going to be, we get it, hammering that point home seems to be your primary function these days. But they will ALWAYS have immense value.

nickdymez
12-30-2012, 08:48 PM
Because I love everything about the game. More insight = more fun. I honestly dont know how much easier I can spell that out for you.


Just watching? LMFAO, no offense but that sounds awfully boring. Your telling me you never engage in debates with your friends while you watch? I do, I love it, ESPECIALLY if we've been drinking. I dont want to come off conceded but Im kind of a big deal, Im the big fish in a small pond when Im with my friends.

Yes, we know we're not GM's but that doesn't mean we cant at least try to approximate their methodology. Stats arent perfect, never going to be, we get it, hammering that point home seems to be your primary function these days. But they will ALWAYS have immense value.

Sounds good and everything, you guys just lose credibility with me when you try so hard to convince everyone that advanced stats are the way to go. And when someone says they dont use them, you people call that person ignorant, stupid, dumb, missing out, etc. Chill man, you want to watch the game the way you do, others choose to watch it the way they do. Its honestly you advanced stats maniacs that bring this site down because all of your arguments are solely based on advanced stats and when someone says they dont use them, you belittle that person and an argument begins. Just chill. I dont like advanced stats, let that be my prerogative.

Chronz
12-30-2012, 09:09 PM
Because I love everything about the game. More insight = more fun. I honestly dont know how much easier I can spell that out for you.


Just watching? LMFAO, no offense but that sounds awfully boring. Your telling me you never engage in debates with your friends while you watch? I do, I love it, ESPECIALLY if we've been drinking. I dont want to come off conceded but Im kind of a big deal, Im the big fish in a small pond when Im with my friends.

Yes, we know we're not GM's but that doesn't mean we cant at least try to approximate their methodology. Stats arent perfect, never going to be, we get it, hammering that point home seems to be your primary function these days. But they will ALWAYS have immense value.

Sounds good and everything, you guys just lose credibility with me when you try so hard to convince everyone that advanced stats are the way to go. And when someone says they dont use them, you people call that person ignorant, stupid, dumb, missing out, etc. Chill man, you want to watch the game the way you do, others choose to watch it the way they do. Its honestly you advanced stats maniacs that bring this site down because all of your arguments are solely based on advanced stats and when someone says they dont use them, you belittle that person and an argument begins. Just chill. I dont like advanced stats, let that be my prerogative.
Nothing you said was true, I never force my beliefs upon anyone, I merely expose the inaccuracies of outdated metrics.

I've made this clear to you before but it gos in one ear and out the other but Ill say it again. If you don't use stats in your argument so be it, but if your going to use stats, use the ones that actual statisticians put more value in. I should copy and paste this argument next time you pull this ****

nickdymez
12-30-2012, 09:54 PM
Nothing you said was true, I never force my beliefs upon anyone, I merely expose the inaccuracies of outdated metrics.

I've made this clear to you before but it gos in one ear and out the other but Ill say it again. If you don't use stats in your argument so be it, but if your going to use stats, use the ones that actual statisticians put more value in. I should copy and paste this argument next time you pull this ****

Knock yourself out. Im never going to use advanced stats and most will not.

Chronz
12-31-2012, 01:39 AM
Knock yourself out.
Huh?


Im never going to use advanced stats and most will not.
Call me selfish but I hope your right but it doesn't seem to be trending that way. More and more people are starting to see the value in APBR metrics.

Which brings me to my next question, do you mean you will never use advanced metrics or that you will never use stats period?
There is a difference, one means your a traditional fan the other means your willfully ignorant.

JordansBulls
01-01-2013, 09:00 PM
Well I would be sure that MJ would get better stats as well if he knew PER and WS were around when he played. Afterall he is still #1 all time in PER in the season and WS/PER 48 minutes in the season and playoffs.

Dnovakovic099
01-03-2013, 06:35 PM
Sounds good and everything, you guys just lose credibility with me when you try so hard to convince everyone that advanced stats are the way to go. And when someone says they dont use them, you people call that person ignorant, stupid, dumb, missing out, etc. Chill man, you want to watch the game the way you do, others choose to watch it the way they do. Its honestly you advanced stats maniacs that bring this site down because all of your arguments are solely based on advanced stats and when someone says they dont use them, you belittle that person and an argument begins. Just chill. I dont like advanced stats, let that be my prerogative.

First, let me start by saying I don't really follow advanced stats that much, or regular stats for that matter. I also agree with you that stats have HUGE flaws. The players around you, your coaches, and the scheme you are in dictates your stats alot. However, we cannot watch every game, if you do then I will definitively listen to you about basketball, and so what are we left with to judge a player besides stats? You cannot judge a player from a few game sample size. Hence, you would atleast need to watch 15 or so games of every team during different parts of the season to get a good overview of every team. So, if you aren't using stats to judge players and you haven't watched a significant amount of a certain team, my question to you is what do you use to judge these players?

Chronz
01-03-2013, 06:47 PM
Well I would be sure that MJ would get better stats as well if he knew PER and WS were around when he played. Afterall he is still #1 all time in PER in the season and WS/PER 48 minutes in the season and playoffs.

What?

nickdymez
01-03-2013, 06:54 PM
First, let me start by saying I don't really follow advanced stats that much, or regular stats for that matter. I also agree with you that stats have HUGE flaws. The players around you, your coaches, and the scheme you are in dictates your stats alot. However, we cannot watch every game, if you do then I will definitively listen to you about basketball, and so what are we left with to judge a player besides stats? You cannot judge a player from a few game sample size. Hence, you would atleast need to watch 15 or so games of every team during different parts of the season to get a good overview of every team. So, if you aren't using stats to judge players and you haven't watched a significant amount of a certain team, my question to you is what do you use to judge these players?

Good post man. I respect your opinion and I also respect the fact that you made an attempt to help me understand why you use them without calling me names or trying to berate me because I choose to not use advanced stats.

I agree with your logic 100%, it is nearly impossible to eye test every player. I will never argue that fact. I will argue with someone who tells me another player is better than another player purely based off stats. Perfect example is Jordan. Most people on this board will argue that Lebron is the next best thing to Jordan, and it isnt close. I've had the luxary of actually watching Jordan play while I was growing up (Im in my 30's) and watching Lebron play now. People will tell you that Lebron is on Jordan's level and they have'nt even really seen Jordan play except maybe highlights. To me stats (Basic or "caveman" as they are refered to here) are just the beggining to judging a player. They show me if a player is in the same league as another player, then I will eye test. And I will say "Oh, this guy scores better than that guy because this is happening", something along those lines. Advanced stat guy doesnt seem to take any intangibles into consideration when comparing two players. Its simply "Guy A has a better WS than Guy B, so how can you argue that Guy B is better?" Its silly.

b@llhog24
01-03-2013, 07:46 PM
So many words, yet still didn't answer the question.