Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 409 of 549 FirstFirst ... 309359399407408409410411419459509 ... LastLast
Results 6,121 to 6,135 of 8229
  1. #6121
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    wait, so the guy dislikes 1v1 but adores 90s ball and kobe?
    yep, that's right.

  2. #6122
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Nope, you are wrong dude and this is not debatable. Go ahead and look up any textbook (I teach this stuff man lol). The differences are not likely to become smaller, the variance is likely to decrease. What a larger sample, you will get closer to the true population mean, meaning what ever the true value is for whatever you are measuring you are more likely to get close to it. Your example, actually demonstrates a common misunderstanding among undergraduate students. With a coin flip you get closer to 50% the more flips you have because the true value is 50%. I can't believe you legitimately just tried to school a scientist with a triple PhD, on statistics (only in the internet would someone like you dare try something so hilariously outlandish)
    Well first, itís very obvious you are lying about your job and your credentials, so well start there.

    But more importantly, you still havenít answered my question:

    What statistics do you use regarding basketball?

  3. #6123
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    It is okay, because it's what I like. Questioning that is analogous to questioning someone who likes ketchup on a burger but not a hot dog, they can like whatever they want.
    No itís like saying I like ketchup on a burger not a hot dog thatís why I like this places burgers and not this other places hotdogs despite the fact the burger place you like doesnít put ketchup on the burger and the other place doesnít put ketchup on the hotdog.

    I agree you have an opinion, Iím saying the reasons you gave for why you like one and not the other are directly contradictory to what you claim you like.

  4. #6124
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    In the 90s/00s, the game was played inside out and there was an entire offensive system built around having all players involved. We don't see that anymore. That's not what the game is today.
    Again, youíre displaying your ignorance. No they did not have all players involved on offense, not even remotely close. Do you know what a clear out even is? They did that a ton in the 90ís. How is going and standing in a corner to let someone go ISO being involved in the play?

  5. #6125
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Well first, itís very obvious you are lying about your job and your credentials, so well start there.

    But more importantly, you still havenít answered my question:

    What statistics do you use regarding basketball?
    Yeah okay dude. I just obliterated your example and that's an understatement.

    I don't use statistics in basketball, because I do not believe that they provide meaningful data. Because the variables in basketball are closely intertwined, it can only be analyzed using a dynamics systems approach, not basic linear arithmetic, which is how present analytics approach the problem. It's analogous to trying to dissect an insect with a sledge hammer.

  6. #6126
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Again, youíre displaying your ignorance. No they did not have all players involved on offense, not even remotely close. Do you know what a clear out even is? They did that a ton in the 90ís. How is going and standing in a corner to let someone go ISO being involved in the play?
    yes, that was a play. There was also a TON of inside out play.

  7. #6127
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yeah okay dude. I just obliterated your example and that's an understatement.

    I don't use statistics in basketball, because I do not believe that they provide meaningful data. Because the variables in basketball are closely intertwined, it can only be analyzed using a dynamics systems approach, not basic linear arithmetic, which is how present analytics approach the problem. It's analogous to trying to dissect an insect with a sledge hammer.
    So the actual statistician doesnít use statistics. Yeah, youíre lying your *** off bro

  8. #6128
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    yes, that was a play. There was also a TON of inside out play.
    Wait, so you actually like when teams would tell everyone to go sit in a corner and let their star ISO?

  9. #6129
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    So the actual statistician doesnít use statistics. Yeah, youíre lying your *** off bro :laugh2
    Oh I use statistics, just not to assess players. I hope you can see why your example was wrong though. With small sample sizes you are not more likely to get large differences, you are more likely to get random fluctuations. Those differences can be small or big. If I have a shooting contest with Steph curry, I'm more likely to win or lose by less if we shoot 3 three's each than if we shoot 100 3s because by random chance, I can make all 3 and curry might miss one or maybe we would both make all 3. In that case, the true difference between us would be masked by the smaller sample size and would actually be smaller than the true difference in our shooting ability. At any rate, I just added that information for your own benefit, as I certainly wouldn't want you going around having an incorrect concept like that without making a concerted effort to let you know why it's wrong (whether you actually listen is on you).
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 06-09-2020 at 08:36 PM.

  10. #6130
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Wait, so you actually like when teams would tell everyone to go sit in a corner and let their star ISO?
    No, they would play inside-out. Ball goes down low, defense collapses, ball goes back out, defense scrambles to recover, etc. Obviously someone is going to get the ball at some point that doesn't mean they're going one-on-one the entire time nor are they intended to.

  11. #6131
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Oh I use statistics, just not to assess players. I hope you can see why your example was wrong though. With small sample sizes you are not more likely to get large differences, you are more likely to get random fluctuations. Those differences can be small or big. If I have a shooting contest with Steph curry, I'm more likely to win or less by less if we shoot 3 three's each than if we shoot 100 3s because by random chance, I can make all 3 and curry might miss one or maybe we would both make all 3. In that case, the true difference between us would be masked by the smaller sample size and would actually be smaller than the true difference. At any rate, I just added that information for your own benefit, as I certainly wouldn't want you going around having an incorrect concept there without making a concerted effort to let you know why it's wrong.
    Oh, I was already aware of that. I just didnít know that you couldnít use statistics for anything that involves variables that effect the statistics. There is NO statistician (except you apparently ) that would say we cannot use statistics to measure things unless we can account for 100% of all factors or variables, only that the statistics we do use wonít be 109% accurate at what theyíre measuring because of that.

    I have literally never seen anyone involved in statistics say not to use stats if they canít perfectly tell us something. Thatís how I know youíre full of ****.

  12. #6132
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    No, they would play inside-out. Ball goes down low, defense collapses, ball goes back out, defense scrambles to recover, etc. Obviously someone is going to get the ball at some point that doesn't mean they're going one-on-one the entire time nor are they intended to.
    What youíre describing is closer to a post-up than what I said. They did both. Obviously, you havenít actually watched much 90ís/00ís basketball if you donít think they simply waved everyone off and went one on one. They did that then more than at any other time in basketball history.

  13. #6133
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Oh, I was already aware of that. I just didnít know that you couldnít use statistics for anything that involves variables that effect the statistics. There is NO statistician (except you apparently ) that would say we cannot use statistics to measure things unless we can account for 100% of all factors or variables, only that the statistics we do use wonít be 109% accurate at what theyíre measuring because of that.

    I have literally never seen anyone involved in statistics say not to use stats if they canít perfectly tell us something. Thatís how I know youíre full of ****.
    Except that's not what I'm saying: I'm saying that the present approach is inappropriate to use and can provide greatly misleading information. It's like if someone has a heart issue but we don't have any medicine for their heart problem so instead we insist on giving them kidney medicine on the premise that some medicine is better than no medicine. Clearly, that's not always going to be the case.

  14. #6134
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,647
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    What youíre describing is closer to a post-up than what I said. They did both. Obviously, you havenít actually watched much 90ís/00ís basketball if you donít think they simply waved everyone off and went one on one. They did that then more than at any other time in basketball history.
    I don't know if thats true or not, but like I said, there was also an entire offensive system that was being run. Today it's basically one-on-one and transition 3s. I find that very boring and rec center-like.

  15. #6135
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    36,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I don't know if thats true or not, but like I said, there was also an entire offensive system that was being run. Today it's basically one-on-one and transition 3s. I find that very boring and rec center-like.
    Of course you donít know whether thatís true or not, obviously you donít know what youíre talking about (on both parts of your post).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •