|
On June 26 2017 11:13 RowdierBob wrote:
I've been spitballing a Love trade on another forum that would send Love to the Bucks and PG to the Cavs. How goes:
Indy out: PG
Indy in: Jabari/Mil 2018 first/Brog/filler if need be
Cavs out: Love
Cavs in: PG
Bucks out: Jabari/2018 first/Brogdon/filler
Bucks in: Love
Would this be enough for Indy or can they do better? What if the Bucks threw in a 2019 right to swap picks?
I don't believe the Bucks are going to trade Jabari and Brogdon just for Love tbh.
Brogdon has a promising rookie season and Jabari played really well before he got injured.
|
On June 26 2017 12:35 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2017 11:57 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 26 2017 09:04 Jerubaal wrote:On June 26 2017 00:07 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 25 2017 23:10 Twinkle Toes wrote:
I'm loving it. One know-it-all name drops and terms drops about something he knows nothing about, then another know-it-all makes his own claim of arrogance/ignorance! Hey, I'm taking exception if you are talking about me. It is he after all who throws out all these big stat words and waive it around people's faces as if they were words uttered by god himself. I would like to explain why he is wrong, in full mathematical detail, but the ball is on his court since all throughout this thread he is the one doing all the term dropping. NOTE: No self-respecting mathematician or statistician would make bold absolute claims without any context NOTE 2: Not specially since the methods and equations are relatively new NOTE 3: And not most especially without providing consideration for regression ridges and other variations. TLDR: He is the one making all this absolute claims which are biased and are an abuse of data. He barely even understands it and would make for a good leader of the "iamveysmart" group No offense, but this is a rather "Jimmy-like" post. You've made a lot of theses, but you haven't really explained exactly what you mean or given any evidence. We're all extremely interested to hear what you have to say about it. It's cool none taken. We should give him a chance though, since it's him blabbering about APM advanced stats and all. Once we have a clear idea what he is actually talking about and his level of knowledge on the subject matter, then I will immediately respond. If he does not respond on this topic before the Nba award show tomorrow, then he is effectively surrendering his point and admitting that he has no knowledge about how advanced statistics is and should be used in the Nba. In other news, 3-team IND-CLE-DEN trade involving PG and Love is bad for Indiana. We have enough known redflags for Love despite his remarkable Minnie stint, and PG is heavy on the upside. Pacers should decline if only because teams could be hustled for a PG trade even on a rental. The thought is Den give pacers stuff because there chance of ever getting a FA the quality of love is low and they would have him for 3 years. So Love wouldn't be in Indy. It sort of makes sense but who knows how much den is willing to give up for love. As for the stats talk I agree with both you and Jeru. JJ is clearly reading the thread so he could easily respond and his silence does speak volumes. That being said if you explained the specifics of your argument it would also hold more water.
Fair enough.
But in the interest of a proper debate on this matter, I want to give him a chance to defend himself. I worry that once I put out a thorough demonstration of why he is wrong, he will simply resort to moving the goal post or claim that his earlier statements were misunderstood.
He can do this easily since I have seen him do this a couple of times earlier, and all he makes are general statements that it is difficult to respond to him with rigor unless he makes his points very clear. He continuously drops terms like xAPM this, VORP that et cetera et cetera, and people let him off the hook for lack of energy or knowledge on the subject matter.
If he is indeed a fan of sports analytics, then he can do no worse than by refusing to engage in this argument.
Believe me, I am as excited as you are to read his response. It's his move now.
|
Interesting. I searched the thread and the Finals thread and realized he is the same person who bragged about watching game lives. Now it's too funny.
Anyway, Nike/Jordan just released a Kawhi ad:
Could Kawhi get buckets on Kawhi?
|
On June 26 2017 13:50 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2017 12:35 JimmiC wrote:On June 26 2017 11:57 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 26 2017 09:04 Jerubaal wrote:On June 26 2017 00:07 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 25 2017 23:10 Twinkle Toes wrote:
I'm loving it. One know-it-all name drops and terms drops about something he knows nothing about, then another know-it-all makes his own claim of arrogance/ignorance! Hey, I'm taking exception if you are talking about me. It is he after all who throws out all these big stat words and waive it around people's faces as if they were words uttered by god himself. I would like to explain why he is wrong, in full mathematical detail, but the ball is on his court since all throughout this thread he is the one doing all the term dropping. NOTE: No self-respecting mathematician or statistician would make bold absolute claims without any context NOTE 2: Not specially since the methods and equations are relatively new NOTE 3: And not most especially without providing consideration for regression ridges and other variations. TLDR: He is the one making all this absolute claims which are biased and are an abuse of data. He barely even understands it and would make for a good leader of the "iamveysmart" group No offense, but this is a rather "Jimmy-like" post. You've made a lot of theses, but you haven't really explained exactly what you mean or given any evidence. We're all extremely interested to hear what you have to say about it. It's cool none taken. We should give him a chance though, since it's him blabbering about APM advanced stats and all. Once we have a clear idea what he is actually talking about and his level of knowledge on the subject matter, then I will immediately respond. If he does not respond on this topic before the Nba award show tomorrow, then he is effectively surrendering his point and admitting that he has no knowledge about how advanced statistics is and should be used in the Nba. In other news, 3-team IND-CLE-DEN trade involving PG and Love is bad for Indiana. We have enough known redflags for Love despite his remarkable Minnie stint, and PG is heavy on the upside. Pacers should decline if only because teams could be hustled for a PG trade even on a rental. The thought is Den give pacers stuff because there chance of ever getting a FA the quality of love is low and they would have him for 3 years. So Love wouldn't be in Indy. It sort of makes sense but who knows how much den is willing to give up for love. As for the stats talk I agree with both you and Jeru. JJ is clearly reading the thread so he could easily respond and his silence does speak volumes. That being said if you explained the specifics of your argument it would also hold more water. Fair enough. But in the interest of a proper debate on this matter, I want to give him a chance to defend himself. I worry that once I put out a thorough demonstration of why he is wrong, he will simply resort to moving the goal post or claim that his earlier statements were misunderstood. He can do this easily since I have seen him do this a couple of times earlier, and all he makes are general statements that it is difficult to respond to him with rigor unless he makes his points very clear. He continuously drops terms like xAPM this, VORP that et cetera et cetera, and people let him off the hook for lack of energy or knowledge on the subject matter. If he is indeed a fan of sports analytics, then he can do no worse than by refusing to engage in this argument. Believe me, I am as excited as you are to read his response. It's his move now.
My only hope is that he (and his various other nicknames) gets to taste the banhammer again like in the NHL thread back in the day.
Maybe then the discussion here would be more varied and not about Wiggins and "advanced statistics" every other page.
In other news, new rumours sending Griffin to Heat. I like it, offensively they would get better.. I dunno with overall team chemistry especially in defense. BG would be playing in a free flowing offense, and actually have a legit backup big man (Bam Adebayo).
|
I got curious so I dug up.
Wow what a savage humiliation. He couldn't even manage a reply.
But I mean seriously who brags about watching the games live???
Now. I feel bad for calling him out. Is he a troll on this site or something?
That temp banned post right after, lol!
For reference:
On June 18 2017 01:40 Twinkle Toes wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 22:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On June 17 2017 16:24 Twinkle Toes wrote:On June 17 2017 15:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
How many live games have people in here seen of LBJ, Leonard, KD, Curry, and Westbrook in the past 4 years.
I've seen LBJ about 10 times. Curry twice. KD twice. Westbrook 3 times and Leonard 1 time.
I think LBJ is still the best in the world by a slim margin, but i have not seen the other players enough to state for 100% certain. I have seen enough games of eastern conference teams that i'd say LBJ is the best player in the eastern conference by a big margin.
i think live game observation is a critical component in player evaluation. This is too funny to pass up. In an era of abundant live television/livestream broadacst, analysts and sports journalists going the full spectrum ranging from ESPN Simmons to SAS/Skip and all the other two-bit "journalists", comprehensive scouting reports, predraft combines and thorough physicals, advanced metrics and big data anuhlitics, to frothy social media that lets us know when Klay is high, what Lebron is jamming to, where and what Booker ate for dinner, and all the other impertinent and irreverent sports drama, all available through this magical world of the cyber - please, oh pretty please, educate us unwashed plebeians what "critical component in player evaluation" can be gleaned through live games that are not available in any of the above? And might I also inquire as to which seats provide the best viewpoint in conducting such evaluations? i like to be within 15 rows of the court. however, any where in the building and then later going home and watching it on TV still provides more information. obviously the closer to the action the more info the LIVE experience adds. anyhow, you want snarky , fuck you attitude.. here you go. i didn't fully appreciate LBJ's game until i went to the Air Canada Centre 2 hours before game time. If the difference between the top 5 players were large it'd be easy to say who is the best. I think the difference between these guys is small enough that live game evaluation is crucial. my uncle has scouted for 3 NHL teams. every scout will tell you that you get the most info by actually being there. When Dana White looks for new fighting talent his attitude is... "tv is ok" .. "physically being at ringside tells you far more." This also applies to the NBA and every other sport. when advanced scouts stop going to the building and just sit on their couch .. .. lemme know. more and many diverse forms of information are valuable.... and 1 of those forms includes live game observation. This is the most elaborate (only in the sense that an inebriated man finds the space between his door and the living room couch elaborate) use of the English language in order to say exactly nothing. No other configuration of English words delivered a more dedicate, precise, and effective utterance of senselessness. Let me simplify this for you: When you claimed "critical component in player evaluation", I did not exactly expect some multiverse-forming, life-changing, zero-dividing truth to be revealed before us. A little sensible explanation would have been enough. Instead, what do we get? A verbal diarrhea of self-repetitions, anecdotes, humblebrags, logical fallacies, weasel words, incoherent rambling, internal contradictions, hollow statement, and complete nonsense. You could have made better use of the three hours you spent composing your reply by typing down "I don't know what I'm talking about" in all of ten seconds and we would all have gone on with our lives with little remark. If you are still confused, let me simplify it even further: Show nested quote +i didn't fully appreciate LBJ's game until i went to the Air Canada Centre 2 hours before game time. If the difference between the top 5 players were large it'd be easy to say who is the best. I think the difference between these guys is small enough that live game evaluation is crucial. What is this difference then that can only be seen by watching the game live in person instead of the other platforms I mentioned before (such as live tv/net broadcast, youtube, advanced analytics, expert analysis and punditry, comprehensive scouting reports, industry-standard physical evaluation, and social media posts)? I'm not saying that there aren't. as there might very well be. All I'm saying is that since YOU claimed there are "critical component in player evaluation" available through watching the game in person that is nor available elsewhere, YOU provide the evidence for such. In this case, you have failed to do so. Merely saying so doesn't make it so. Show nested quote +my uncle has scouted for 3 NHL teams. every scout will tell you that you get the most info by actually being there. When Dana White looks for new fighting talent his attitude is... "tv is ok" .. "physically being at ringside tells you far more." This also applies to the NBA and every other sport. This is neither here nor there. I could also go to great lengths about my uncle and and talk about how he scouts and evaluates which wrestler in WWE is the best. Mighty Mouse would also have you know about Dana to "Don't believe his lies". I think I've made my point clear on this specific retort. BESIDES, did I not already include "comprehensive scouting" in one of the methods to evaluate players? So unless we (not general "we" but actual you and me) are scouts, it is best that we leave the actual scout-level evaluation to professional scouts, and make our informed opinion based on their reports. Besides again, this still does not answer the question of What "critical component in player evaluation have you gathered by being physically being present during games that you cannot otherwise? You just said your uncle says so, Dana White says so, etc. etc, so it must be true. Show nested quote +when advanced scouts stop going to the building and just sit on their couch .. .. lemme know. Oh dear god! This is the same as above, only bolder and more aneurysm-inducing in its sheer asininity. Show nested quote +more and many diverse forms of information are valuable.... and 1 of those forms includes live game observation. I'm stretching a bit on this one, but since I've gone this far, I might as well. This one is is poorly-constructed. I think you meant to write "more and many diverse forms methods of information -gathering are valuable.... and 1 of those forms includes live game observation." And then again, you run the same problem of doing wild ramblings instead of supporting your claim. Listen kiddo, I don't mean to be harsh, but unless you really have some support for your claim, learn from this exchange and suck it in. I mean you no harm, and you should take none. Let's go and enjoy the rest of the day. PS. I know you are a kid for many reasons, such as but not limited to, your diction, grammar, punctuation, and writing style, the quality of your arguments, and not very many Americans in their twenties and older would refer to Lebron James as LBJ. So please don't tell me you're not a kid anymore.
|
Oh well, he lived by the sword, and died by the sword.
Anyway, dude xwoG, do you mind (via PM if you don't want to post it here yet) providing an explanation of analytics that could be helpful to average Joe fan. I get in similar debates a lot, and it's difficult to parse through the discussion when they resort to mathematical gobbledygook Would greatly appreciate it, thanks.
Griffin to the Heat? Hmmnnn. I don't know but I seriously think Griffin's career is done. He will go down as a could have been like Grant Hill, only three or four notches lower, and without the talent and niceness, and all the frat boy assholeness.
|
Eh, when he's playing he ouputs a solid 22/8/5 per game, that's not really a player that's "done". My concern about him is if he continues to get these random-ass injuries. Maybe that's just bad luck, this will be only his 8th season.
If he can stay healthy, and even with most of his explosiveness gone, he has evolved really well as a PF. Can shoot reliably (even extending to 3pt range), can handle and pass, has some decent post-ups.
He doesn't have much upside left, but he's still a top 3 PF in the league.
|
I exaggerate. But I meant his random injuries remove him as an all-star level player and make him fringe good player who can still make solid contributions.
|
|
|
if my posts are mis-characterized i will correct the poster. Fortunately, the poster acknowledged they mischaracterized my post. This poster has directly misquoted me in the past.
On June 25 2017 14:24 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 15:30 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Magic Johnson: "D'Angelo is an excellent player. He has the talent to be an All-Star. We want to thank him for what he did for us. But what I needed was a leader. I needed somebody also that can make the other players better and also [somebody] that players want to play with." magic stahp! he ded already! Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 23:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Adjusted plus minus takes into account the quality of all other 9 people on the court. There are several Timberwolves with very good defensive APM. In fact, when Minnie's #2 defender went down late in the year as i noted in last year's thread Minnie's defense collapsed. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sports/515339-nba-2016-17-season?page=61#1205Adjusted +/- is basically a system of 600+ equations with the # of unknowns being the players who played in the NBA. You solve for the unknowns in an analogous way that you solve for a system of 2 equations and 2 unknowns in grade 9 math. Because there are more equations than unknowns, an overdetermined system, you solve for the unknowns ( which are the individual NBA players ) via Regression. Every NBA line up playing against each other is an equation with 10 unknowns with a (+) on the side of the team that scored more points during their time on the court. As a "smell test" for the results on Wiggins check out his impact on team mates. There is a mountain of data on Wiggins playing with all levels of team mates over his 3 year career. He has yet to make any team mate better defensively. The vast majoritty of his mate's defensive efficiency declines in Wiggins presence. There are a few Wiggins team mates whose defensive efficiency stays the same. http://www.82games.com/1617/1617MIN2.HTMOn the contrary, many Minnesota players experienced an improvement in their defensive efficiency in the presence of Nemanja Bjelica and Ricky Rubio. Wiggins is 1 of the worst defenders in the NBA and finding that is the easiest thing for any advanced stat. The hard part of an advanced defensive stat is to determine whether or not a very slightly below average defender is as good as a dead-on average defender. That is a tough problem. Determining the worst in the league is easy and its been a solved problem for ~10 years now. The guy who solved this issue using Adjusted +/- was at the forefront of research in this area 14 years ago and he is now employed by Cleveland. http://www.82games.com/comm30.htm As a math "geek" who got interested in basketball because of moreyball, advanced stat, and big data, i've got to say this is one of the most laughably ignorantly idiotic statements ever. I'm willing to bet you do not understand the normative and operative functions of these formulas in evaluating players. Heck, I'm even willing to bet you barely understand half of them.
my background in dealing with adjusted +/- includes running an adjusted +/- analysis of NHL teams using Visual Foxpro for data crunching, and a COM object feeding R for the regression on the data. if you want me to go into more detail i can.
i've already posted several items showing how long +/- and APM has been around and the research going on behind the statistic. If people want to have a direct discusion about the value of these stats great. my posts are there.
However,
On June 26 2017 19:11 TropicalHaze wrote:
Maybe then the discussion here would be more varied and not about Wiggins and "advanced statistics" every other page.
(1) +/-, APM , and xRAPM are all useless
(2) advanced stats are discussed too much and i'm sick of them.
if you combine (1) and (2) then there is no point in moving forward.
On June 24 2017 23:43 JimmiC wrote: There is a reason why some teams hire analytics departments and then fire them shortly after.
Dan Rosenbaum a leading pioneer in adjusted plus/minus has been employed as a consultant by cleveland for 10+ years.
the guy is good and his research is solid. i've posted his most influential early work. Some analytics is bad. Some is good. Rosenbaum is still around after 10+ years because he and his work are solid.
|
|
|
if i post the entire quote my post would be 300 lines long. for brevity i include the relevant parts.
you brought it up so...
not enough scoring in the NHL. i like hockey. the year i did it i had access to the NHL data and not the NBA data and in the initial research stages APM for hockey and basketball are the same and vanilla +/- is still identical in both sports.
my posts are still there and if any one wants a direct discussion about their strengths and weakness great.
Onto something more interesting.
http://fansided.com/2017/05/10/nylon-calculus-explaining-raptors-playoff-disasters/
" the Raptors don’t fail when Lowry’s on the court in the playoffs; they fail when someone else is."
|
I respect the use of advanced anulytics erneh. But the idea that you would switch from Sport A to Sport B because the advanced data was finally publicly made available for Sport B is pretty funny.
How naive of me to just like playing and watching basketball. If xRAPMORP one day becomes available for gaelic football, you won't see me here anymore guys.
|
Despite the sillyness and unintentional comedy, I think it is a good discussion to be having nonetheless. May I suggest that both of you Jimmy and xwaG (and to everyone else for that matter) elaborate and clarify the jargons so that everyone have a good chance to be on the same page and can assess what's what.
What you are doing right now is what everyone has been hating about you. Stop beating around the bush, dodging, and talking generic technical nonsense. I am sure you can feel now that everyone can already see through you. You have been directly challenge. You have to respond honestly in defending yourself. Post that 300 post here now so we can see your side of the story.
|
On June 27 2017 02:20 ZenithM wrote:
I respect the use of advanced anulytics erneh. But the idea that you would switch from Sport A to Sport B because the advanced data was finally publicly made available for Sport B is pretty funny.
How naive of me to just like playing and watching basketball. If xRAPMORP one day becomes available for gaelic football, you won't see me here anymore guys.
i did not switch sports. i still watch hockey just not the NHL due to a lack of scoring.
back in 2007 i watched both sports. and vanilla +/- is identical in both. and when you take the first baby steps forward in developing APM it remains identical in both sports.
On June 27 2017 02:24 Twinkle Toes wrote: Post that 300 post here now so we can see your side of the story.
what is a "300 post" ?
JARGON
"R" is an open source product for doing regression on a set of data.
Visual Foxpro manipulates large tables of data. its simple and easy to use.
COM Objects can be built with Visual Foxpro and allow Visual Foxpro to communicate with other Windows EXE files. this requires some programming skills but nothing more than 1 year of college.. its not some in depth computer science research.
|
if i post the entire quote my post would be 300 lines long
Are you interested in an honest discussion?
|
On June 27 2017 02:33 Twinkle Toes wrote:Are you interested in an honest discussion?
yep, do you want me to include the entire quote that i'm providing for a rebuttal in all its entirety then?
if you want me to post it i will. but it'll be long. i think by only including the relevant parts it kept my post shorter and more to the point. but if you want it all... i can do that.
|
Go ahead, post it here please.
I asked if you are genuinely interested in an honest discussion because it will make things easier for all of us. May I request that in your succeeding posts, please let go of all the baggage and treat the discussion as a new one and make your thesis statement clear. Thanks.
|
here comes a longer version of this post
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sports/523843-nba-offseason-2017?page=13#250
now you have both a long version and a short version of my rebuttals.
if my posts are mis-characterized i will correct the poster. Fortunately, the poster acknowledged they mischaracterized my post. This poster has directly misquoted me in the past.
On June 25 2017 14:24 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 15:30 Twinkle Toes wrote:
Magic Johnson: "D'Angelo is an excellent player. He has the talent to be an All-Star. We want to thank him for what he did for us. But what I needed was a leader. I needed somebody also that can make the other players better and also [somebody] that players want to play with." magic stahp! he ded already! Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 23:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Adjusted plus minus takes into account the quality of all other 9 people on the court. There are several Timberwolves with very good defensive APM. In fact, when Minnie's #2 defender went down late in the year as i noted in last year's thread Minnie's defense collapsed. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sports/515339-nba-2016-17-season?page=61#1205Adjusted +/- is basically a system of 600+ equations with the # of unknowns being the players who played in the NBA. You solve for the unknowns in an analogous way that you solve for a system of 2 equations and 2 unknowns in grade 9 math. Because there are more equations than unknowns, an overdetermined system, you solve for the unknowns ( which are the individual NBA players ) via Regression. Every NBA line up playing against each other is an equation with 10 unknowns with a (+) on the side of the team that scored more points during their time on the court. As a "smell test" for the results on Wiggins check out his impact on team mates. There is a mountain of data on Wiggins playing with all levels of team mates over his 3 year career. He has yet to make any team mate better defensively. The vast majoritty of his mate's defensive efficiency declines in Wiggins presence. There are a few Wiggins team mates whose defensive efficiency stays the same. http://www.82games.com/1617/1617MIN2.HTMOn the contrary, many Minnesota players experienced an improvement in their defensive efficiency in the presence of Nemanja Bjelica and Ricky Rubio. Wiggins is 1 of the worst defenders in the NBA and finding that is the easiest thing for any advanced stat. The hard part of an advanced defensive stat is to determine whether or not a very slightly below average defender is as good as a dead-on average defender. That is a tough problem. Determining the worst in the league is easy and its been a solved problem for ~10 years now. The guy who solved this issue using Adjusted +/- was at the forefront of research in this area 14 years ago and he is now employed by Cleveland. http://www.82games.com/comm30.htm As a math "geek" who got interested in basketball because of moreyball, advanced stat, and big data, i've got to say this is one of the most laughably ignorantly idiotic statements ever. I'm willing to bet you do not understand the normative and operative functions of these formulas in evaluating players. Heck, I'm even willing to bet you barely understand half of them.
my background in dealing with adjusted +/- includes running an adjusted +/- analysis of NHL teams using Visual Foxpro for data crunching, and a COM object feeding R for the regression on the data. if you want me to go into more detail i can.
i've already posted several items showing how long +/- and APM has been around and the research going on behind the statistic. If people want to have a direct discusion about the value of these stats great. my posts are there.
However, On June 26 2017 19:11 TropicalHaze wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2017 13:50 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 26 2017 12:35 JimmiC wrote:On June 26 2017 11:57 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 26 2017 09:04 Jerubaal wrote:On June 26 2017 00:07 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:On June 25 2017 23:10 Twinkle Toes wrote:
I'm loving it. One know-it-all name drops and terms drops about something he knows nothing about, then another know-it-all makes his own claim of arrogance/ignorance! Hey, I'm taking exception if you are talking about me. It is he after all who throws out all these big stat words and waive it around people's faces as if they were words uttered by god himself. I would like to explain why he is wrong, in full mathematical detail, but the ball is on his court since all throughout this thread he is the one doing all the term dropping. NOTE: No self-respecting mathematician or statistician would make bold absolute claims without any context NOTE 2: Not specially since the methods and equations are relatively new NOTE 3: And not most especially without providing consideration for regression ridges and other variations. TLDR: He is the one making all this absolute claims which are biased and are an abuse of data. He barely even understands it and would make for a good leader of the "iamveysmart" group No offense, but this is a rather "Jimmy-like" post. You've made a lot of theses, but you haven't really explained exactly what you mean or given any evidence. We're all extremely interested to hear what you have to say about it. It's cool none taken. We should give him a chance though, since it's him blabbering about APM advanced stats and all. Once we have a clear idea what he is actually talking about and his level of knowledge on the subject matter, then I will immediately respond. If he does not respond on this topic before the Nba award show tomorrow, then he is effectively surrendering his point and admitting that he has no knowledge about how advanced statistics is and should be used in the Nba. In other news, 3-team IND-CLE-DEN trade involving PG and Love is bad for Indiana. We have enough known redflags for Love despite his remarkable Minnie stint, and PG is heavy on the upside. Pacers should decline if only because teams could be hustled for a PG trade even on a rental. The thought is Den give pacers stuff because there chance of ever getting a FA the quality of love is low and they would have him for 3 years. So Love wouldn't be in Indy. It sort of makes sense but who knows how much den is willing to give up for love. As for the stats talk I agree with both you and Jeru. JJ is clearly reading the thread so he could easily respond and his silence does speak volumes. That being said if you explained the specifics of your argument it would also hold more water. Fair enough. But in the interest of a proper debate on this matter, I want to give him a chance to defend himself. I worry that once I put out a thorough demonstration of why he is wrong, he will simply resort to moving the goal post or claim that his earlier statements were misunderstood. He can do this easily since I have seen him do this a couple of times earlier, and all he makes are general statements that it is difficult to respond to him with rigor unless he makes his points very clear. He continuously drops terms like xAPM this, VORP that et cetera et cetera, and people let him off the hook for lack of energy or knowledge on the subject matter. If he is indeed a fan of sports analytics, then he can do no worse than by refusing to engage in this argument. Believe me, I am as excited as you are to read his response. It's his move now. My only hope is that he (and his various other nicknames) gets to taste the banhammer again like in the NHL thread back in the day. Maybe then the discussion here would be more varied and not about Wiggins and "advanced statistics" every other page. In other news, new rumours sending Griffin to Heat. I like it, offensively they would get better.. I dunno with overall team chemistry especially in defense. BG would be playing in a free flowing offense, and actually have a legit backup big man (Bam Adebayo).
(1) +/-, APM , and xRAPM are all useless
(2) advanced stats are discussed too much and i'm sick of them.
if you combine (1) and (2) then there is no point in moving forward.
Dan Rosenbaum a leading pioneer in adjusted plus/minus has been employed as a consultant by cleveland for 10+ years.
the guy is good and his research is solid. i've posted his most influential early work. Some analytics is bad. Some is good. Rosenbaum is still around after 10+ years because he and his work are solid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
