Seeing AL Objectively - SLCdunk article

[theNBAnerd]

How many minutes is "most of the quarter"?

umm, 6+.

I'd like it better is you 1) looked at every game to see if it meets the criteria or not (some do get blown out late in the fourth quarter, and it only takes 7 consecutive points to from "less than 10" to "more than 15"), 2) set precise quanta to ("at least 6:01 with the difference in score being under 9"), and 3) stopped relying on your judgement for how close things are.

oh come on... now you're just mincing. my sample was plenty objective. any game that was decided by 15 or less and had a close margin through most of the 4th can accurately described as "anybody's game." any game that doesn't meet those criteria probably doesn't belong in this study to begin with.

thing is, if you could point to one single game that was in the sample that shouldn't have been (or vice versa), we'd be talking about that. instead, you're just trying to attack the IDEA of my methodology because you don't like that it didn't say what you thought it would say.

seriously, show me one included/excluded game you have a problem with and we'll discuss why it should or shouldn't belong. my guess is you have none.

I don't have any particular attachment to Jefferson. If he's traded away before the season starts, I'll neither weep nor jump for joy (depending on the person being brought back, of course).

However, I will say that any time a survey or sample that I conduct confirms my original points, I take that as a sign I may be doing something wrong.

so my analysis must be wrong simply because it confirmed my original assertion? haha. ok, dude.

 

[One Brow]

oh come on... now you're just mincing. my sample was plenty objective. any game that was decided by 15 or less and had a close margin through most of the 4th can accurately described as "anybody's game."

I don't think you understand what "objective" means.

so my analysis must be wrong simply because it confirmed my original assertion? haha. ok, dude.

Not must be wrong, but must be questioned. The most natural thing in the world for a human to do is convince themselves that they are right.

 

[franklin]

Someone doesn't understand the unimportance of clutch shooting & high importance of playing team ball in these situations. Millsap has been visually awful when the focal point. He's not better than Kobe Bryant because he had 2 or 3 excellent 4th quarters last year. And LAL shouldn't trade Kobe over Meta because Meta shoots 35% that Kobe does in 82games.com's clutch statistic.

And none of this changes the fact that Jefferson continually faced double & triple teams inside an offense that refused to produce open shooters in clutch situations. And none of this changes the fact that the Jazz had one of the top offenses last season because Jefferson saw so many touches.



The relevancy of all this Jefferson hate will not mean anything until after he is surrounded by competent shooters. Again, the Jazz had one of the best offenses in the league despite being at the bottom in 3 point shooting. So yeah, let's hyperventilate & blame Jefferson for carrying a shoddy team to a 54% win record. He was obviously not the reason the Jazz had a winning record last year.

 

[pickledXgrandma]

Someone doesn't understand the unimportance of clutch shooting & high importance of playing team ball in these situations. Millsap has been visually awful when the focal point. He's not better than Kobe Bryant because he had 2 or 3 excellent 4th quarters last year. And LAL shouldn't trade Kobe over Meta because Meta shoots 35% that Kobe does in 82games.com's clutch statistic.

And none of this changes the fact that Jefferson continually faced double & triple teamsg inside an offense that refused to produce open shooters in clutch situations. And none of this changes the fact that the Jazz had one of the top offenses last season because Jefferson saw so many touches.



The relevancy of all this Jefferson hate will not mean anything until after he is surrounded by competent shooters. Again, the Jazz had one of the best offenses in the league despite being at the bottom in 3 point shooting. So yeah, let's hyperventilate & blame Jefferson for carrying a shoddy team to a 54% win record. He was obviously not the reason the Jazz had a winning record last year.

How does Big Als man gravy taste?

 

[theNBAnerd]

I don't think you understand what "objective" means.



Not must be wrong, but must be questioned. The most natural thing in the world for a human to do is convince themselves that they are right.

1) i had a hypothesis
2) i tested it by looking at all losses that met a certain criteria
3) the losses confirmed my hypothesis
4) you questioned the method and said we needed to look at close wins, too
5) i tested the hypothesis again by looking at all wins that met a certain criteria
6) the wins confirmed my hypothesis
7) you are still arguing, but instead of focusing on the findings, you're now in a smoke-and-mirrors thing about methodology because you know that the numbers say what the numbers say.

you still have yet to point out a single game that my allegedly subjective criteria incorrectly ruled in or out of the sample. probably because you don't really care and you just want to piss all over the study that YOU asked me to expand.

 

[One Brow]

you still have yet to point out a single game that my allegedly subjective criteria incorrectly ruled in or out of the sample. probably because you don't really care and you just want to piss all over the study that YOU asked me to expand.

How would one go about saying that a game was correctly or incorrectly ruled out based on subjective criteria?

You seem annoyed that I don't find your work convincing. I'm just explaining the type of standards needed to make it convincing. I don't see why your convincing me needs to be a priority in your life. Maybe Millsap is the greatest thing since sliced bread in the fourth quarter and Jefferson is stale toast. All I know is that the only study I know of that looked at every game, with specific pre-defined crieria, finds the performance to be about equal. That's does mean they are equal, of course.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

How does Big Als man gravy taste?

The most underrated poster on the board folks.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Millsap also misses a lot more with that contact. The result is a basically even eFG%. One gets free throws, the other makes more baskets. So, how is one performance much better than the other?

My numbers include all games, wins and losses.

I realize you have no obligation to me.

My eyes must be playing tricks on me because Millsap has shot a better percentage from the field both years that they've played together. On top of Millsap running the floor, being able to guard anyone in the PnR, and again, getting to the line. And having a much better eFG%.

So yeah, my eyes must be going out of their minds.

 

[NAOS]

My eyes must be playing tricks on me because Millsap has shot a better percentage from the field both years that they've played together. On top of Millsap running the floor, being able to guard anyone in the PnR, and again, getting to the line. And having a much better eFG%.

So yeah, my eyes must be going out of their minds.

I don't know how much of this thread you've read, but there has been a heaping amount of distrust of the eyes.

But, One Brow has taught me something about statistics methodology, so I'll give some rep.

One Brow, is it still true that you don't get to see many of the games?

 

[theNBAnerd]

How would one go about saying that a game was correctly or incorrectly ruled out based on subjective criteria?

You seem annoyed that I don't find your work convincing. I'm just explaining the type of standards needed to make it convincing. I don't see why your convincing me needs to be a priority in your life. Maybe Millsap is the greatest thing since sliced bread in the fourth quarter and Jefferson is stale toast. All I know is that the only study I know of that looked at every game, with specific pre-defined crieria, finds the performance to be about equal. That's does mean they are equal, of course.

not that it matters, but my study "looked at every game, with specific pre-defined criteria." i started with the entire schedule and selected every game where:

a) final margin </= 15, AND
b) for at least half of the 4th quarter, the margin < 10

but whatever. you thinking i'm wrong just because i'd prefer to be right is what i consider to be a faulty analysis.

My eyes must be playing tricks on me because Millsap has shot a better percentage from the field both years that they've played together. On top of Millsap running the floor, being able to guard anyone in the PnR, and again, getting to the line. And having a much better eFG%.

So yeah, my eyes must be going out of their minds.

and has better range outside 10 feet, and can score from more angles/spots on the floor, and attacks the rim, and isn't afraid of contact on either end of the floor, and hustles more....

PPS in the two years they have played together - paul 1.28 vs. al 1.09. that is a HUUUUGE difference. even if we use point per "attempt", which basically forgives the fact that al shots a free throw for about every 6th FGA (compared to 1 in 3 for paul), the difference is still 1.12 to 1.04 in paul's favor over the two years.

 

[One Brow]

But, One Brow has taught me something about statistics methodology, so I'll give some rep.

One Brow, is it still true that you don't get to see many of the games?

Just the ones televised nationally. Just last year I got NBA TV, that helped a little.

 

[One Brow]

but whatever. you thinking i'm wrong just because i'd prefer to be right is what i consider to be a faulty analysis.

That's not what I said. I'd re-word it, but I'm not sure it would matter.