All-Defensive Teams announced.

[Matthew]

I never said you said they were perfect. You posted some abstract stats about defensive efficiency and never acknowledged what they don't encompass. I don't think any ratings they miss out on two critical aspects of defense as "ideal".

I offered a series of methods to further analysis of players, you pointed out the obvious fact that they contain limitations and are not perfect. That's fine, but I'm wondering where the people are who believed otherwise.

If it's "fine", why did you cry about it?

[benji]

Because too many people just post to state the obvious? It's affecting the state of the NLSC in my opinion. (Edit: (imo))

never acknowledged what they don't encompass

I stated exactly what they did. Why would anyone assume it included things not stated in what it did include?

There was nothing "abstract" about them. I specifically stated exactly what they were.

I don't think any ratings they miss out on two critical aspects of defense as "ideal".

Well, first we should consider that I didn't call them ideal.

Assuming I do not have access to a visual record of all 2400+ games, would not have the time to record the information even if I did, and do not wish to further parse the PbP, what method would acquire a greater amount of information allowing for better analysis?

[Matthew]

It may be that the provided statistics are not ideal, but they are as ideal as we have so far. Unless someone on here would actually watch all 2400+ games and count.

You said they are as ideal as we have so far. They don't even acknowledge help defense or how good the offensive player is they are guarding.

Because too many people just post to state the obvious? It's affecting the state of the NLSC in my opinion. (Edit: (imo))

And some people are so vague in their posts that its affecting the state of the NLSC in my opinion (Edit: (imo lollz hahahaha lollol hahahah))

I stated exactly what they did. Why would anyone assume it included things not stated in what it did include?

I never said you didn't say what they included. But to the casual fan they could easily not realise the significance of help defense or the ability of the player they are guarding. I pointed it out. Sorry maybe I should have been more vague in my post or just agreed with you.

The thing is though, I've seen you add your criticisms of things. I posts my criticism of these stats and you question why I do it. I couldn't care less but it's a contradiction.

Assuming I do not have access to a visual record of all 2400+ games, would not have the time to record the information even if I did, and do not wish to further parse the PbP, what method would acquire a greater amount of information allowing for better analysis?

Wait. Should I be vague and just respond endlessly to try and make myself look smart here?

[benji]

You said they are as ideal as we have so far. They don't even acknowledge help defense or how good the offensive player is they are guarding.

You said they are as ideal as we have so far.

ideal as we have so far.

Anyway.

I never said you didn't say what they included.

You posted ... and never acknowledged what they don't encompass

You said I did not post what they didn't include, but I posted what they did and no rational person would assume a claim of including things that are not stated in the list of things included.

The thing is though, I've seen you add your criticisms of things. I posts my criticism of these stats and you question why I do it. I couldn't care less but it's a contradiction.

How is that a contradiction? When I offer counterarguments, I offer counterarguments and expect them to be questioned. You know, instead of just posting things without any discussion intended.

Wait. Should I be vague and just respond endlessly to try and make myself look smart here?

You could, you know, answer the question.

[Matthew]

You said I did not post what they didn't include, but I posted what they did and no rational person would assume a claim of including things that are not stated in the list of things included.

It's called pointing something out. If someone posts "Iverson scores 51 points!" and someone says "but he shot 14/41", it's completely valid.

How is that a contradiction? When I offer counterarguments, I offer counterarguments and expect them to be questioned. You know, instead of just posting things without any discussion intended.

I questioned your beloved stats and you attacked me for doing so. That's not really helping a discussion.

You could, you know, answer the question.

I know I could.

[BigKaboom2]

I wish someone would explain the whole "stats are not sufficient for evaluating players" argument. It seems to be the dominant theme of NBA Talk.

I also don't understand why saying "methods of choosing NBA award recipients are flawed" ISN'T the most obvious and pointless statement in the world.

[benji]

It's called pointing something out. If someone posts "Iverson scores 51 points!" and someone says "but he shot 14/41", it's completely valid.

Is it? I'd say both are meaningless and too obvious of things to post. Now if someone was to say "Iverson's 51 points were worthless because he didn't make every single shot" that would be an argument, and different.

I questioned your beloved stats and you attacked me for doing so.

So, saying you were stating the obvious, and nothing related to the discussion at hand, while asking you to provide your own, clearly superior, method of analysis is "attacking" now...

I know I could.

But you won't. Because you aren't actually interested in doing anything but scoring cheap shots.

You could actually post your, or other, apparently superior and flawless methods to analyze the defense. You could talk about why the things "missing" are so important. But you're more interested in just making obvious statements (that are supposed to act as some kind of counterargument) and whining about how you were "attacked" when questioned apparently.

[Modifly]

How did Battier ended on the second team? I always thought he would be a solid candidate for the first. Is Bowen doing a better job than Battier which is why he is on the first team?

[benji]

The media doesn't like him as much, sorry.

[Matthew]

Is it? I'd say both are meaningless and too obvious of things to post. Now if someone was to say "Iverson's 51 points were worthless because he didn't make every single shot" that would be an argument, and different.

You've gone crazy. Being different and creative does not make something valid.

So, saying you were stating the obvious, and nothing related to the discussion at hand, while asking you to provide your own, clearly superior, method of analysis is "attacking" now...

That's not what you did. You got all butthurt that someone dared to question your precious stats.

But you won't. Because you aren't actually interested in doing anything but scoring cheap shots.

Yah yah, it made my day.

You could actually post your, or other, apparently superior and flawless methods to analyze the defense. You could talk about why the things "missing" are so important. But you're more interested in just making obvious statements (that are supposed to act as some kind of counterargument) and whining about how you were "attacked" when questioned apparently.

You actually need someone to tell you why help defense and who you are guarding are important factors into whether someone is an effective defender? I think that would stating the obvious and I refuse to do so

[BigKaboom2]

You got all butthurt that someone dared to question your precious stats.

So stats like eFG% belong to benji and a bunch of elitists, while PPG and such are for the common man? They're just numbers all derived from the same events - what's the problem with using them as an aid to draw conclusions?

You actually need someone to tell you why help defense and who you are guarding are important factors into whether someone is an effective defender? I think that would stating the obvious and I refuse to do so

Yeah yeah yeah, but how do you think the all-defensive team should be selected? Just by "watching the games" and deciding who seems the most impressive?

[Matthew]

Aw Benji, you deleted your post?

So stats like eFG% belong to benji and a bunch of elitists, while PPG and such are for the common man? They're just numbers all derived from the same events - what's the problem with using them as an aid to draw conclusions?

So whats your problem with reading posts already within this thread?

"Where did I reject it? I simply said it shouldn't be the only way of ranking defenders."

It's OK, I'm sure Ben still loves you

Yeah yeah yeah, but how do you think the all-defensive team should be selected? Just by "watching the games" and deciding who seems the most impressive?

By licking each others ballsack, thats how. I've pointed how it's flawed to rely on just those formulas. But you seem to like them, so are you willing to say Jordan Farmar is a superior defender to Kevin Garnet?

[benji]

You actually need someone to tell you why help defense and who you are guarding are important factors into whether someone is an effective defender?

Yes, I would like you to explain the value of these things and why they outweigh or don't outweigh other things. Especially in comparison to the value of things we do know.

so are you willing to say Jordan Farmar is a superior defender to Kevin Garnet?

Do you have any evidence that he's not? If you did, would you even bother to post it?

Or, would you just post something like "I can't believe you think Farmar is better than KG "?

[BigKaboom2]

I haven't seen you say anything positive about using stats to determine the awards. Did I miss something that said otherwise?

By licking each others ballsack, thats how. I've pointed how it's flawed to rely on just those formulas. But you seem to like them, so are you willing to say Jordan Farmar is a superior defender to Kevin Garnet?

.....huh? This is the least acceptable response I can imagine.

[Modifly]

The media doesn't like him as much, sorry.

Aha, Now I understand why

[Matthew]

Do you have any evidence that he's not? If you did, would you even bother to post it?

Or, would you just post something like "I can't believe you think Farmar is better than KG Laughing"?

You posted "evidence" saying Farmer is better, I'm just checking to see if that is your opinion. Is it?

I haven't seen you say anything positive about using stats to determine the awards. Did I miss something that said otherwise?

Look harder.

"It's good information, but it doesn't take into account the ability of the offensive players being guarded nor does it take into account help defense. Because there are still holes in the data, it shouldn't just be used in determining who is a good defender."

[BigKaboom2]

Well if you would propose what else should be used, I could evaluate your position. As it stands you've rejected and denounced benji's method but have not offered anything to replace it.

[benji]

I'm just checking to see if that is your opinion. Is it?

Pretend it is.

[Matthew]

Well if you would propose what else should be used, I could evaluate your position. As it stands you've rejected and denounced benji's method but have not offered anything to replace it.

Are you fucking thick? I didn't reject it nor did I denounce Ben's method. I said there are holes in that formula and I stand by that statement.

Pretend it is.

What? You want me to pretend that you think that Jordan Farmer is a better defender because you don't have the guts to stand by your stats. I think I'll pass.

[BigKaboom2]

Well if you would propose what else should be used, I could evaluate your position.

Well if you would propose what else should be used, I could evaluate your position.

Well if you would propose what else should be used, I could evaluate your position.

Who's being thick here? I don't understand what's preventing you from posting an actual opinion instead of ragging on both benji and myself.

[benji]

What? You want me to pretend that you think that Jordan Farmer is a better defender because you don't have the guts to stand by your stats. I think I'll pass.

I don't need guts to stand by the stats. They're right and I will stand by the statistics completely. Jordan Farmar gets more stops, as defined on the first page, per opposing team possession than Kevin Garnett. Every time I place the data into the method, the result is the same.

Will I make the leap to declare Farmar the better defender over KG, based on one piece of data? No, but I have yet to see the argument that Farmar isn't superior from you or anyone.

Let's play your game, shall we? I don't think you have the guts to actually debate anything on this forum that isn't about the members of the forum. I won't back out by saying "I didn't say Farmar is better," I can actually debate things.

[Matthew]

Who's being thick here? I don't understand what's preventing you from posting an actual opinion instead of ragging on both benji and myself.

I read this earlier. It just so happens I couldn't care less about being elevated in your eyes.

I don't need guts to stand by the stats. They're right and I will stand by the statistics completely. Jordan Farmar gets more stops, as defined on the first page, per opposing team possession than Kevin Garnett. Every time I place the data into the method, the result is the same.

It's such a shame that it's a all defensive team award and not who gets the most stats award.

Will I make the leap to declare Farmar the better defender over KG, based on one piece of data? No, but I have yet to see the argument that Farmar isn't superior from you or anyone.

This is what I said from the very beginning! Your stats cant be the only piece of evidence used in determining who are the best defenders in the NBA.

Let's play your game, shall we? I don't think you have the guts to actually debate anything on this forum that isn't about the members of the forum. I won't back out by saying "I didn't say Farmar is better," I can actually debate things.

I dont think you can. Our entire "debate" was over whether your stats could be used to determine who the best defenders are, and you just agreed with me that it cant.

[benji]

It was? Because I believe that using data is the only way to determine the best defensive players.

Your stats cant be the only piece of evidence used in determining who are the best defenders in the NBA.

It is the only evidence I've seen one way or the other so far however. Especially from you. Why don't you have the "guts" to go after the low hanging fruit of a claim "Farmar is a better defender than Garnett"?

It's such a shame that it's a all defensive team award and not who gets the most stats award.

Which of course leads back to the original question...one you also have yet to answer beyond "whatever I think it should be."

[BigKaboom2]

I read this earlier. It just so happens I couldn't care less about being elevated in your eyes.

I don't know what this means.

This is what I said from the very beginning! Your stats cant be the only piece of evidence used in determining who are the best defenders in the NBA.

Then by all means tell us what we should be using. I'd love to hear your enlightened viewpoint on the matter but you won't cough it up and I don't understand why.

Our entire "debate" was over whether your stats could be used to determine who the best defenders are, and you just agreed with me that it cant.

Haven't you been saying all along that stats could be used at least in part to determine who the best defenders are? Now they're completely irrelevant? I don't get it.

[Matthew]

benji
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 pm

BigKaboom2
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:06 pm

BigKaboom2
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:19 pm

benji
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:19 pm

BigKaboom2
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 6:04 pm

benji
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 6:05 pm

benji
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:03 pm

BigKaboom2
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:05 pm

This is so cute I don't know what to say

It was? Because I believe that using data is the only way to determine the best defensive players.

Wait, what? You said in your previous post that You didn't think Farmer was the superior defender despite the indisputable evidence that he gets more stops according to your excellent formula.

But now your saying your data is right which is a contradiction of your previous statement.

It is the only evidence I've seen one way or the other so far however. Especially from you. Why don't you have the "guts" to go after the low hanging fruit of a claim "Farmar is a better defender than Garnett"?

Because it's the most absurd thing I've ever heard in my life. If a retard calls me dumb do you think I'd stand there arguing with him or I'd laugh at the comment and keep walking? This is the same thing, I couldn't care less. If someone on here says "Shaq is a better shooter then Glen Rice in his prime" do you expect a 1500 word response proving him wrong or people to just look at it and laugh?

Which of course leads back to the original question...one you also have yet to answer beyond "whatever I think it should be."

You of all people can't question peoples methods of who ranking defenders when yours has Jordan Farmar ahead of Garnett.

Haven't you been saying all along that stats could be used at least in part to determine who the best defenders are? Now they're completely irrelevant? I don't get it.

Of course they can be used, but they should never be the be all and end all of a discussion. Simple.