What's new
By:

2018 Annual JazzFanz Current Players NBA Draft

Ron Mexico said:
That was me and you completely misunderstood the discussion.

No one claimed he was better than Gobert, no one said he should start, no one showed stats that said he was a better defender than Gobert. I only said he could be worth the risk on a minimum contact and see what the development staff could do with him as an end of the bench guy.

Someone said he was a ball stopper and a black hole and I showed that he passed the ball more than our bigs.

So that's a terrible example and wrong.

Numbers are great and take out your bias. They are not everything, but helpful.

And at the end of the day stats are more accurate than whatever personal feelings you have.

The real problem is you misunderstand most of the discussions about them.
Click to expand...

You make good points but at the same time numbers dont quantify everything and can be misleading.
 
Ron Mexico said:
That was me and you completely misunderstood the discussion.

No one claimed he was better than Gobert, no one said he should start, no one showed stats that said he was a better defender than Gobert. I only said he could be worth the risk on a minimum contact and see what the development staff could do with him as an end of the bench guy.

Someone said he was a ball stopper and a black hole and I showed that he passed the ball more than our bigs.

So that's a terrible example and wrong.

Numbers are great and take out your bias. They are not everything, but helpful.

And at the end of the day stats are more accurate than whatever personal feelings you have.

The real problem is you misunderstand most of the discussions about them.
Click to expand...
And numbers just for numbers are pointless. All stats I cite are to help build a case of something I see on the court.

Sent from my SM-G950U using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Gas said:
You make good points but at the same time numbers dont quantify everything and can be misleading.
Click to expand...

Rgiss said:
And numbers just for numbers are pointless. All stats I cite are to help build a case of something I see on the court.

Sent from my SM-G950U using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree. Plus there is the fact that people on here watch the games as well. I dont know of anyone who is on this message board regularly that posts stats but doesnt actually watch any NBA. That seems pretty silly claim.
 
Rgiss said:
And numbers just for numbers are pointless. All stats I cite are to help build a case of something I see on the court.
Click to expand...

It's also cool when numbers suggest that "what you see on the court" may be, in fact, incorrect due to bias. You may wind up sticking to your view, but sometimes you can challenge your belief and perhaps improve your POV.
 
silesian said:
unfortunately, a categorical dismissal for that sort of reason is misguided. No analyst worth their salt looks at one stat to reach a conclusion about one player versus another. That is called "turning off your brain." You can't even say "player X has more PPG, therefore he is a better scorer." Because context matters.

Instead, good analysts view stats in context -- in combination with other stats, testing hypotheses with empirical facts, and watching basketball. If you see a guy who seems to do little things right that helps the team win, but do not show up on standard box score, check out RPM and other plus/minus. Do they support your hypothesis? If so your hypothesis is strengthened. If not, are there other ways the guy is hurting your team that offset the positive things he is doing? People look at Gobert and see a game changing defender. DRPM backs this up. People looked at Hayward and believed that he was a solid defender and DRPM said he was consistently mediocre. Do you conclude he is mediocre and stop thinking? Of course not. This is where analysis STARTS, not ENDS. So you ask why? You watch games more closely. Are things he is doing on defense shutting down his cover but are his rotations inferior? Does he miss boxouts and does this lead to easy baskets that hurt his team? Are you biased in a way that affects your point of view? Or is the statistic misleading for certain types of players? Why might that be? Think, test, rethink, retest. it's a cool process.

By thinking and viewing a set of statistics and observations, you build insight. Give it a shot!
Click to expand...
Well put

Sent from my SM-G950U using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Lauri Markannen was in the 86th percentile as the ball handler in the pick and roll. He really excelled in that role at the end of the season. I think he will play more center and get a chance to run the double big pick and roll that is going to be awesome this year with Jabari and Carter.
 
Ron Mexico said:
Lauri Markannen was in the 86th percentile as the ball handler in the pick and roll. He really excelled in that role at the end of the season. I think he will play more center and get a chance to run the double big pick and roll that is going to be awesome this year with Jabari and Carter.
Click to expand...

I'm a fan. Were you the one who said he's rich man's Porzingis? If so, I tend to agree. I can't stand watching that black hole jack up contested mid range shots.
 
Siro said:
I'm a fan. Were you the one who said he's rich man's Porzingis? If so, I tend to agree. I can't stand watching that black hole jack up contested mid range shots.
Click to expand...
Yes, they had pretty identical rookie years. But I think Lauri will surpass him in the next couple years for sure, but maybe as soon as next year. He is a smarter player, who is more athletic, a better shooter, and a better passer. Porzingis is a better iso scorer, is slightly taller, and a better rim protector.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top